Business
Charlie Munger, Who Helped Warren Buffett Build Investment Powerhouse Berkshire Hathaway, Dies At 99
OMAHA, Nebraska – Charlie Munger, who assisted Warren Buffett in transforming Berkshire Hathaway into an investment juggernaut, died in a California hospital. He was 99.
Berkshire Hathaway confirmed in a statement that Munger died Tuesday morning at the hospital, just over a month before his 100th birthday.
“Berkshire Hathaway could not have been built to its present status without Charlie’s inspiration, wisdom and participation,” Buffett said. The legendary investor also paid respect to Munger in his annual letter to Berkshire shareholders earlier this year.
Munger acted as Buffett’s sounding board for investment and business choices and helped run Berkshire Hathaway for more than five decades as its vice chairman.
Charlie Munger, Who Helped Warren Buffett Build Investment Powerhouse Berkshire Hathaway, Dies At 99
Munger had needed a wheelchair for years to move around, but he had stayed mentally alert. That was evident as he handled hours of questions at the annual meetings of Berkshire Hathaway and the Daily Journal Corp. earlier this year and in recent interviews with an investing podcast, The Wall Street Journal, and CNBC.
Munger liked to remain in the shadows and let Buffett be the face of Berkshire Hathaway, and he frequently downplayed his contributions to the company’s extraordinary success.
On the other hand, Buffett has always credited Munger for pushing him beyond his early value investing tactics to acquire wonderful businesses at low prices, such as See’s Candy.
“Charlie has taught me a lot about valuing businesses and human nature,” Buffett stated in 2008.
Buffett’s early success was founded on lessons learned from former Columbia University professor Ben Graham. He would buy stock in companies selling for less than their assets were worth and then sell the shares when the market price rose.
Munger and Buffett began purchasing Berkshire Hathaway stock in 1962 for $7 and $8 per share, respectively, and bought ownership of the New England textile factory in 1965. Over time, the two brothers molded Berkshire into its current conglomerate by reinvesting profits from its businesses in companies such as Geico Insurance and BNSF Railroad. They also kept a high-profile stock portfolio, including big Apple and Coca-Cola stakes. The stock reached $546,869 on Tuesday, and many investors became wealthy by holding on to it.
Munger gave a lengthy interview to CNBC earlier this month in anticipation of his 100th birthday, and the business network aired parts from that discussion on Tuesday. In his characteristically self-deprecating tone, Munger summarized Berkshire’s achievement as avoiding mistakes and working well into his and Buffett’s 90s.
“We got a little less crazy than most people and a little less stupid than most people and that really helped us,” remarked Munger. In a special letter he published in 2014 to commemorate 50 years of helping manage the company, he went into greater depth on the reasons for Berkshire’s success.
Charlie Munger, Who Helped Warren Buffett Build Investment Powerhouse Berkshire Hathaway, Dies At 99
Buffett and Charlie resided more than 1,500 miles (2,400 kilometers) apart for their collaboration, but Buffett stated he would phone Munger in Los Angeles or Pasadena to confer on every major decision he made.
“Many will miss him, perhaps none more than Mr. Buffett, who relied heavily on his wisdom and counsel.” I envied their friendship. “They challenged each other while also seeming to enjoy each other’s company,” Edward Jones analyst Jim Shanahan said.
Berkshire would probably do fine without Charlie, according to CFRA Research analyst Cathy Seifert, but there is no way to replace the role he served. After all, Munger was one of the few people ready to tell Buffett he was incorrect about something.
“The most pronounced impact, I think, is going to be over the next several years as we see Buffett navigate without him,” he said.
Charlie grew raised in Omaha, Nebraska, only five blocks from Buffett’s current home, but because Munger is seven years older, the two men never met as youngsters, even though both worked at the grocery shop owned by Buffett’s grandfather and uncle.
When the two men met at an Omaha dinner party in 1959, Munger was a Southern California lawyer, and Buffett headed an investing business in Omaha.
Buffett and Munger hit it off right away, according to the biography in the canonical book on Munger, “Poor Charlie’s Almanack: The Wit and Wisdom of Charles T. Munger.”
During the 1960s and 1970s, the two men traded investment ideas and occasionally invested in the same companies. They became the two largest shareholders in one of their mutual investments, trading stamp maker Blue Chip Stamp Co., and purchased See’s Candy, the Buffalo News, and Wesco. Munger was appointed vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway in 1978 and chairman and president of Wesco Financial in 1984.
Berkshire’s legions of devoted shareholders who frequently filled an Omaha arena to hear the two men will recall Munger’s curmudgeonly comments when addressing questions alongside Buffett at the annual meetings.
Charlie was well-known for saying, “I have nothing to add” after several of Buffett’s lengthy responses at Berkshire meetings. However, Munger frequently provided crisp responses that cut to the heart of an issue, such as his advice on finding a solid investment in 2012.
“If it’s got a really high commission on it, don’t bother looking at it,” he told me.
Whitney Tilson, an investor, has attended the Berkshire Hathaway annual meetings for the past 26 years to learn from Charlie and Buffett, who shared life lessons and investing advice. Tilson stated that Charlie taught that after attaining some success, “your whole approach to life should be how not to screw it up, how not to lose what you’ve got” because reputation and integrity are the most valuable assets and can be lost in an instant.
“In the investment world, it’s the same thing is in your personal world, which is your main goal should be avoiding the catastrophic mistakes that could destroy an investment record, that can destroy a life,” he stated.
“Charlie has taught me a lot about valuing businesses and human nature,” Buffett stated in 2008.
Munger famously summarized the counsel, “All I want to know is where I’m going to die so (that) I never go there.”
Munger was well-known for being an avid reader and student of human behavior. He used several models from fields such as psychology, physics, and mathematics to evaluate potential investments.
Munger attended the University of Michigan in the 1940s but dropped out to serve as a meteorologist in the Army Air Corps during WWII.
He then acquired a law degree from Harvard University in 1948 despite having yet to complete an undergraduate degree. He co-founded a legal practice in Los Angeles that carries his name today, but he quickly realized that he preferred investing.
At one point, Charlie had a fortune of more than $2 billion and was named one of the wealthiest Americans. Munger’s fortune dwindled over time as he gave away more of it, but the ever-increasing value of Berkshire’s stock kept him affluent.
Munger has greatly contributed to Harvard-Westlake, Stanford University Law School, the University of Michigan, and the Huntington Library, among others. After his wife died in 2010, he also left much of his Berkshire stock to his eight children.
Charlie also served on the boards of Good Samaritan Hospital and the Los Angeles-based private Harvard-Westlake School. Munger also served on the board of Costco Wholesale Corp. and as chairman of the Daily Journal Corp. for many years.
SOURCE – (AP)
Business
Internet Archive Loses Major Copyright Case Court Rejects Their Arguments
The Internet Archive has lost a critical legal battle, potentially affecting the future of internet history. Today, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided against the long-running digital archive, affirming a previous decision in Hachette v. Internet Archive, which determined that one of the Internet Archive’s book digitization initiatives infringed copyright law.
Notably, the appeals court’s ruling rejects the Internet Archive’s argument that its lending practices were shielded by the fair use doctrine, which permits for copyright infringement in certain circumstances, calling it “unpersuasive.”
In March 2020, the Internet Archive, a San Francisco-based nonprofit, launched the National Emergency Library, or NEL. The epidemic had forced library closures that prevented students, scholars, and readers from accessing millions of books, and the Internet Archive has stated that it was answering to calls from common people and other librarians to assist individuals at home in obtaining the books they required.
The NEL was an extension of the Open Library, an ongoing digital lending experiment in which the Internet Archive scans physical copies of library books and allows individuals to borrow digital versions as if they were conventional reading material rather than e-books. The Open Library lent the books to one person at a time—but the NEL eliminated this ratio requirement, allowing a large number of people to borrow each scanned book at once.
Shortly after its inception, the NEL faced criticism, with some authors claiming that it amounted to piracy. In response, after two months, the Internet Archive abandoned its emergency strategy and imposed lending caps. But the harm had been done. Major publishing giants, including Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley, filed the complaint in June 2020.
In March 2023, the district court found in favour of the publishers. Judge John G. Koeltl determined that the Internet Archive had created “derivative works,” claiming that its copying and lending had “nothing transformative” to offer. Following the initial verdict in Hachette v. Internet Archive, the parties reached an agreement, the specifics of which have not been released; however, the archive has filed an appeal.
According to James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital and internet law at Cornell University, the ruling is “not terribly surprising” in light of recent court interpretations of fair use.
Internet Archive won the appeal
The Internet Archive won the appeal, but only narrowly. Although the Second Circuit upheld the district court’s first decision, it underlined that it did not regard the Internet Archive as a commercial business, emphasising that it was clearly a charitable organisation. Grimmelmann believes this is the appropriate decision: “I’m glad to see that the Second Circuit fixed that mistake.” (He joined an amicus brief in the appeal, saying that classifying the use as commercial was incorrect.)
“Today’s appellate decision upholds the rights of authors and publishers to license and be compensated for their books and other creative works, and reminds us in no uncertain terms that infringement is both costly and antithetical to the public interest,” Association of American Publishers president and CEO Maria A. Pallante said in a statement.
“If there was any doubt, the Court makes clear that under fair use jurisprudence there is nothing transformative about converting entire works into new formats without permission or appropriating the value of derivative works that are a key part of the author’s copyright bundle.”
In a statement, Internet Archive director of library services Chris Freeland expressed dismay with “today’s opinion about the Internet Archive’s digital lending of books that are electronically available elsewhere.” We are reviewing the court’s decision and will continue to defend libraries’ right to own, lend, and preserve books.
Dave Hansen, executive director of the Author’s Alliance, a nonprofit organisation that frequently advocates for increased digital access to books, also spoke out against the verdict. “The authors are researchers. “Authors read,” he says. “IA’s digital library assists authors in creating new works and encourages their desire to have their works read. This verdict may boost the bottom lines of the largest publishers and most well-known authors, but it will harm more people than it will help.
Difficult period for copyright law
The Internet Archive’s legal problems are not ended. In 2023, a collection of music labels, including Universal Music collection and Sony, sued the archive for copyright infringement on a music digitization project. That case is still working its way through the courts. The damages might total up to $400 million, posing an existential danger to the nonprofit.
The new ruling comes at a particularly difficult period for copyright law. There have been scores of copyright infringement cases filed against large AI businesses that provide generative AI tools in the last two years, and many of the defendants contend that the fair use doctrine protects their use of copyrighted data in AI training. Any big lawsuit in which judges reject fair use grounds is widely monitored.
It also comes at a time when the Internet Archive’s critical role in digital preservation is becoming increasingly apparent. The archive’s Wayback Machine, which catalogues website copies, has proven to be an invaluable resource for journalists, scholars, lawyers, and anybody interested in internet history. While there are other digital preservation programs, including national efforts by the US Library of Congress, there is nothing comparable available to the public.
Business
Hewlett Packard Won’t Drop Its UK $11 Billion Claim Against Tech Mogul Mike Lynch, Who Died When His Yacht Sank
LONDON — Hewlett Packard Enterprise announced Monday that it will not dismiss its U.K. claim for damages against the estate of British tech entrepreneur Mike Lynch, who died when his superyacht drowned last month.
In 2022, Britain’s High Court decided primarily to favor the US technology giant, which accused Lynch and his former finance director of fraud concerning its $11 billion acquisition of his software company Autonomy. Hewlett-Packard is seeking up to $4 billion in damages, and the judge is anticipated to make a ruling on the exact amount shortly.
AP News Image
Hewlett Packard Won’t Drop Its UK Claim Against Tech Mogul Mike Lynch, Who Died When His Yacht Sank
Mike perished when his yacht, the Bayesian, fell in a storm off Sicily on August 19. His widow, Angela Bacares, may now be liable for the damages.
Mike was acquitted in a separate US criminal trial of fraud and conspiracy in the agreement months before the sinking.
Hewlett Packard initially applauded its pricey 2011 acquisition of Lynch’s company but soon began to regret it. The corporation stated on Monday that it had “substantially succeeded” in its civil fraud allegations against Lynch and the former finance director, Sushovan Hussain.
“It is HPE’s intention to follow the proceedings through to their conclusion.”
However, the U.K. civil action judge has already concluded that the amount payable in damages will be “substantially less” than what the company is demanding.
The Lynch family’s spokesman declined to respond.
Mike and his daughter Hannah were among six passengers killed when the 56-meter (184-foot) luxury boat sank. One crew member, the boat’s chef, also perished, while 15 people escaped the accident. They gathered on the yacht to celebrate Lynch’s acquittal.
Hewlett Packard Won’t Drop Its UK Claim Against Tech Mogul Mike Lynch, Who Died When His Yacht Sank
Officials first reported that the boat was hit by a tornado over the water, known as a waterspout, but the weather phenomena was later identified as a downburst. Italian prosecutors are investigating the captain on possible accusations of manslaughter.
SOURCE | AP
Business
2024 | Elon Musk Hits Out At Judge Threatening To Suspend X In Brazil
Elon Musk has escalated his online attacks on a Supreme Court judge who has threatened to stop social media platform X in Brazil, labeling him “an evil dictator” in an ongoing battle between the two men.
Justice Alexandre de Moraes threatened to suspend X if Musk did not identify a new legal agent for the company in Brazil and pay any outstanding daily fines within 24 hours.
“Alexandre de Moraes is an evil dictator cosplaying as a judge,” the world’s richest person commented on X.
Elon Musk Hits Out At Judge Threatening To Suspend X In Brazil
Musk, who previously referred to de Moraes as “Darth Vader,” retweeted a statement from X’s Global Government Affairs team announcing that the judge’s “illegal demands and all related court filings” would be published in the coming days.
Brazil is a key market for social media networks. According to the Associated Press, around 40 million Brazilians, or roughly 18% of the population, use X at least once a month.
The trash-talking is the latest salvo in Musk’s spat with de Moraes, which revolves around free speech and alleged disinformation. X said earlier this month that it would suspend its business and lay off its employees in Brazil owing to what it described as “censorship orders” from the judge.
De Moraes had ordered the social media company to ban several X accounts he claimed were disseminating misinformation.
The most recent statement, signed by de Moraes, was also posted on the Supreme Court’s official X account, tagging both Musk and X’s Global Government Affairs account.
The Supreme Court statement was uploaded around 8:30 p.m. local time on Wednesday, giving Musk till Thursday evening local time to answer.
‘Censorship Orders’
On August 17, X issued a lengthy statement announcing that it would be forced to suspend operations and terminate employees in Brazil due to de Moraes’ “censorship orders.”
“Despite our numerous appeals to the Supreme Court not being heard, the Brazilian public not being informed about these orders and our Brazilian staff having no responsibility or control over whether content is blocked on our platform, Moraes has chosen to threaten our staff in Brazil rather than respect the law or due process,” according to the statement from X.
Elon Musk Hits Out At Judge Threatening To Suspend X In Brazil
“As a result, to ensure the safety of our employees, we have decided to close our activity in Brazil, effective immediately. The X service remains available to Brazilians. We are profoundly saddened to have been compelled to make this decision. Alexandre de Moraes is exclusively responsible.
“Due to demands by ‘Justice’ Alexandre [de Moraes] in Brazil that would require us to break (in secret) Brazilian, Argentinian, American and international law, X has no choice but to close our local operations in Brazil,” he said on X’s website.
SOURCE | AP
-
Business4 weeks ago
Are You A Cash App User? You May Be Eligible For A Piece Of This $15 Million Settlement
-
Celebrity4 weeks ago
Liza Minnelli Is ‘Mad As Hell’ And Writing New Memoir
-
Business4 weeks ago
Susan Wojcicki, Former YouTube CEO And Longtime Google Executive, Has Died At 56
-
News4 weeks ago
Travis Scott Is Arrested At A Paris Hotel After Altercation With A Security Guard, Prosecutors Say
-
Entertainment4 weeks ago
Samsung Is Recalling 1 Million Stoves To Prevent Pets From Setting Your Home On Fire
-
Sports4 weeks ago
Lydia Ko Finally Gets Her Olympic Gold. It Puts Her Into The LPGA Hall Of Fame