Book your TC All Stage exhibitor table before today ends
This is it. Only two tables remain to exhibit at TechCrunch All Stage, happening July 15 in Boston — and the booking window officially closes today at 11:59 p.m. PT. If you've been waiting to make your move, now's the time to book your table.
Why your startup should be in the room
This founder-focused conference is where startups — from early-stage to IPO — get discovered, funded, and fast-tracked. The show floor at TC All Stage draws the people who matter: investors, founders, media, and ecosystem leaders all searching for what's next.
Image Credits:Eric Slomonson, The Photo Group
What's included with your table
Explore a snapshot of what's included when your startup secures a spot on the show floor. For full details, head over to the TC All Stage exhibitor page.
A full-day 6' x 3' exhibit table in a high-traffic area
Premium brand placement — on-site, online, and in the event app
A bundle of event passes to explore sessions, network, and connect
Access to investors, media, and prospective clients on the show floor
Exposure through TechCrunch's curated exhibitor listing
A chance to generate leads, demo live, and get real-time feedback
Last chance to make your mark
Thousands will walk the floor at TC All Stage in Boston. Will they see your brand? With only two tables left and the deadline hitting tonight, this is your final shot. Secure your exhibitor table before it's too late.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
27 minutes ago
- CBS News
Police cast wide net in probe of defunct North Texas car dealership's business practices
Desire Godfrey said it was time for a vehicle upgrade. The Lancaster mother had her eye on a Lexus. "I had a baby, so I'm looking for something reliable for me and a baby," Godfrey said. She searched online and found what she thought was the right vehicle at The Reserve Auto Group in The Colony. She described the sales process in May 2024 as a positive experience. Warranty and GAP insurance issues But an unexpected oil change six months later changed everything. Godfrey, 33, said a Lexus dealership informed her the vehicle was not under warranty. She also discovered her GAP insurance policy didn't exist. "They (Reserve Auto Group) never paid the warranty company the money they were supposed to pay to activate this warranty and this GAP insurance," she said. Car loan charges continue Godfrey said the costs were included in her car note. She filed a report with The Colony Police Department — and she's not alone. Police said they received their first complaint on Jan. 31. According to a news release, police have been investigating multiple fraud claims connected to the dealership since 2023. The business shut down in December 2024, but complaints continue to come in. Alleged auto fraud pattern Investigators said customers were allegedly instructed to write separate checks for aftermarket warranties or GAP insurance policies. Those payments were supposed to go to third-party providers, but police said the dealership allegedly cashed the checks and never forwarded the money — leaving customers without coverage. Another victim comes forward A second alleged victim, who spoke to CBS News Texas anonymously, said she and her husband also bought a Lexus from the dealership. She provided a non-activation letter from DOWC Administrative Services LLC, a company that offers GAP insurance and warranties. The letter stated: "Please be advised that Reserve Auto has failed to remit payment to Us as the Administrator and Provider for your Contract. Consequently, the Contract was not activated in our system." Investigation still ongoing Police have not made any arrests or publicly identified anyone associated with the allegations. Officers said they are continuing to vet additional alleged victims. CBS News Texas is not naming the person listed as the dealership's owner, as police have indicated he did nothing wrong. He spoke briefly by phone, saying he wanted to schedule an appointment to discuss the claims further because he believed "we did not have all the facts." When asked for clarification, he said he didn't have time to explain. Legal team responds Two emails followed the call, and attorneys from Herrin Law introduced themselves. "We have no comment at this time. Thank you for your interest in our client's side of the story," attorney Benjamin Palatiere said. He requested that all future inquiries be directed to him. Buyer left without coverage Meanwhile, Godfrey said the vehicle itself has not had any issues. But she continues to pay for a warranty and insurance that don't exist. "So nobody wants to refinance the loan. Nobody wants to give me GAP insurance," she said. "It's just more so like I'm going to take it or leave it. If I wreck the car, then I would have to figure out a way to pay that car off." Godfrey said she hopes to recover the money one day.
CBS News
38 minutes ago
- CBS News
Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel
Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday halted lower court orders that required the White House's Department of Government Efficiency to turn over information to a government watchdog group as part of a lawsuit that tests whether President Trump's cost-cutting task force has to comply with federal public records law. The order from the high court clears DOGE for now from having to turn over records related to its work and personnel, and keeps Amy Gleason, identified as its acting administrator, from having to answer questions at a deposition. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. "The portions of the district court's April 15 discovery order that require the government to disclose the content of intra–executive branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed are not appropriately tailored," the court said in its order. "Any inquiry into whether an entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act cannot turn on the entity's ability to persuade. Furthermore, separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal executive branch communications." The Supreme Court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for more proceedings. Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused the district court's order last month, which allowed the Supreme Court more time to consider the Trump administration's bid for emergency relief. A district judge had ordered DOGE to turn over documents to the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, by June 3, and for Gleason's deposition to be completed by June 13. The underlying issue in the case involves whether DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. CREW argues that the cost-cutting task force wields "substantial independent authority," which makes it a de facto agency that must comply with federal public records law. The Justice Department, however, disagrees and instead claims that DOGE is a presidential advisory body housed within the Executive Office of the President that makes recommendations to the president and federal agencies on matters that are important to Mr. Trump's second-term agenda. DOGE's agency status was not before the Supreme Court, though the high court may be asked to settle that matter in the future. Instead, the Trump administration had asked the justices to temporarily halt a district court's order that allowed CREW to gather certain information from DOGE as part of its effort to determine whether the task force is an advisory panel that is outside FOIA's scope or is an agency that is subject to the records law. The judge overseeing the dispute, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, had ordered DOGE to turn over certain documents to the watchdog group by June 3 and to complete all depositions, including of Gleason, by June 13. Mr. Trump ordered the creation of DOGE on his first day back in the White House as part of his initiative to slash the size of the federal government. Since then, DOGE team members have fanned out to agencies across the executive branch and have been part of efforts to shrink the federal workforce and shutter entities like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Institute of Peace. DOGE has also attempted to gain access to sensitive databases kept by the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and Office of Personnel Management, prompting legal battles. In an effort to learn more about DOGE's structure and operations, CREW submitted an expedited FOIA request to the task force. After it did not respond in a timely manner, CREW filed a lawsuit and sought a preliminary injunction to expedite processing of its records request. The organization argued that DOGE was exercising significant independent authority, which made it an agency subject to FOIA. Cooper granted CREW's request for a preliminary injunction in March and agreed that FOIA likely applies to DOGE because it is "likely exercising substantial independent authority much greater than other [Executive Office of the President] components held to be covered by FOIA." He then allowed CREW to conduct limited information-gathering, which the watchdog group said aimed to determine whether DOGE is exercising substantial authority that would bring it within FOIA's reach. A federal appeals court ultimately declined to pause that order, requiring DOGE to turn over the documents sought by CREW. In seeking the Supreme Court's intervention, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said CREW is conducting a "fishing expedition" into DOGE's activities. He warned that if Cooper's order remains in place, several components of the White House, such as the offices of the chief of staff and national security adviser, would be subject to FOIA. "That untenable result would compromise the provision of candid, confidential advice to the president and disrupt the inner workings of the Executive Branch," Sauer wrote. "Yet, in the decisions below, the court of appeals and district court treated a presidential advisory body as a potential 'agency' based on the persuasive force of its recommendations — threatening opening season for FOIA requests on the president's advisors." But lawyers for CREW told the Supreme Court in a filing that the Justice Department's position "would require courts to blindly yield to the Executive's characterization" of the authority and operations of a component of the Executive Office of the President. They said adopting the Trump administration's approach to DOGE would give the president "free reign" to create new entities within the Executive Office of the President that exercise substantial independent authority but are shielded from transparency laws. "Courts would be forced to blindly accept the government's representations about an EOP unit's realworld operations, unable to test those representations through even limited discovery," CREW's lawyers wrote. "It is that extreme position, not the discovery order, that would 'turn[] FOIA on its head.'"
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
After its data was wiped, KiranaPro's co-founder cannot rule out an external hack
Indian grocery delivery startup KiranaPro's recent data loss story has more holes than Swiss cheese, as the startup remains unclear whether the incident was an internal breach or an external hack. Last week, the Bengaluru-based startup discovered that it could not access its back-end servers and that all its data, including its app code, had been deleted from GitHub. The startup on Friday blamed a former employee for the breach. However, in an interview, KiranaPro co-founder and CEO Deepak Ravindran conceded that the company had not deactivated the employee's account after they departed the company and cannot rule out the possibility of subsequent malicious misuse of their account. "If we go deeper, we have to do a real forensic investigation. We are going to talk [about] this with our board, the investors, and we are going to get a formal opinion on that also with our legal advisers," Ravindran told TechCrunch. Earlier on Friday, Ravindran claimed in a post on X that the incident that affected its data was an internal breach. "After careful investigation, we conclude that this was not a hack. No external party penetrated our ordering or payment systems, exploited vulnerabilities, or bypassed security protocols," he wrote. The co-founder also explicitly shared a screenshot of a LinkedIn profile of one of KiranaPro's former employees on X on Thursday, alleging that they had deleted the startup's code. (TechCrunch is not sharing the post's link, as the startup has yet to offer concrete proof supporting its position.) "[T]his was an internal data breach. Specifically, it was the result of actions taken by a trusted internal employee who had legitimate access to our systems," the co-founder wrote in his post on Friday. "This individual intentionally deleted critical server logs while they were being tested and/or edited, an action that goes directly against our policies, our principles, and the trust we place in our team." When TechCrunch asked if KiranaPro could rule out whether any third party had maliciously gained access to the former employee's account, Ravindran could not. "We have to do a complete forensic check on the company. We have to do the entire IP scan. We have to look at where the tracks happened. We have to check the computers, MacBooks, and whatever is used. Everything has to be done. Then we have to spend money … so, that's why we decided not to," he told TechCrunch. Then what was the basis of Ravindran's allegation? It was a GitHub response, a copy of which he shared with TechCrunch. The response included a username, which Ravindran said was associated with the former employee. "All we have is the emails that we got from GitHub, stating that [the former employee's username] as an individual is the one who deleted the account. We haven't done the investigation further," Ravindran told TechCrunch. Launched in late 2024, KiranaPro operates as a buyer app on the Indian government's Open Network for Digital Commerce. The startup allows more than 55,000 customers in 50 cities to purchase groceries from their local shops and nearby supermarkets using its voice-based interface. The company also supports local language inputs, including English, Hindi, Malayalam, and Tamil. Ravindran stated that they decided to call out the former employee based on the company's "belief system," as they claim the former employee deleted the data after their sudden termination. However, the startup said it is not aware if there were enough protections on the former employee's devices, such as multi-factor authentication, to restrict malicious third-party access, like malware. The company confirmed it did not remove the employee's access to its data and GitHub account following his departure. "Employee offboarding was not being handled properly because there was no full-time HR," KiranaPro's chief technology officer, Saurav Kumar, confirmed to TechCrunch. Alongside its code saved in GitHub, KiranaPro also lost access to its Amazon Web Services (AWS) account, which included its customer data and their transaction details. Ravindran told TechCrunch that the GitHub data was restored after getting its backup from one of their employees. The startup also regained access to its AWS account along with its customer data. Both the co-founder and CTO said the AWS account was protected by multi-factor authentication, but neither could say how the account was accessed, as nobody else had physical access to Ravindran's phone, which generates the multi-factor code. Nonetheless, Ravindran claimed that the customer data stored in the AWS cloud remained intact and was not accessed by any third parties, nor was it downloaded by the former employee in question. "Because if that is the case, I will get its notification on email or anything [sic]," he said. That said, Ravindran stated that the startup has enough evidence to file a formal complaint with the police, but said that its investigation is ongoing. The startup has also not fully paid its current employees, the company's co-founder confirmed, soon after the company raised a seed round of ₹100 million Indian rupees (about $1.2 million), which Ravindran said has yet to be fully wired. The startup counts Blume Ventures, Unpopular Ventures, and Turbostart among its institutional venture backers, as well as Olympic medalist PV Sindhu and Boston Consulting Group managing director Vikas Taneja among its angel investors. It has 15 employees located in Bengaluru and Kerala. Sign in to access your portfolio
