• Disney just struck a partnership with OpenAI that includes a billion-dollar investment.
• Internally, the company has provided employees with a set of AI tools, including a "DisneyGPT" chatbot that uses Walt Disney quotes.
• A chatbot codenamed "Jarvis" is also in the works, four staffers said.

Disney's billion-dollar OpenAI deal isn't the only way the company is embracing AI. In recent months, the Mouse House has been quietly adding new AI tools to its arsenal and encouraging staff to use them.

"They clearly see where things are headed," a longtime software engineer at Disney said. This marked a shift from this summer, when Disney had seemed "hesitant to rely on AI tools," they said.

Disney has given its employees access to several AI tools, including Microsoft Copilot and Amazon's Q Developer. Thanks to Disney's OpenAI deal, employees will also soon have access to the enterprise version of ChatGPT, the company said.

Then there's a "DisneyGPT" chatbot that four staffers said helps with internal requests, such as creating IT support tickets, viewing the company roster, or analyzing a project's financials.

In an email sent to staff on October 2, Disney introduced the beta version of the chatbot, describing it as a "new partner in productivity" designed to help "unlock the magic of your imagination." A December update enabled employees to upload Excel and PowerPoint files to the bot.

DisneyGPT draws on signature Disney themes, with a prompt asking users if they're "ready for an enchanting adventure" and "a verified collection of Walt Disney quotes" that are "tagged by themes like imagination, perseverance, and leadership," according to the chatbot's December update log. Otherwise, employees said DisneyGPT is mostly a standard AI chatbot.

There's also an AI chatbot in the works codenamed "Jarvis," four employees said. Jarvis, named for the personal assistant "J.A.R.V.I.S." from "Iron Man," would be an agentic AI tool — more advanced than DisneyGPT — that completes tasks on an employee's behalf, a high-level staffer with direct knowledge of the company's AI efforts said. This person said Jarvis is in its early stages and is "not fully baked."

"It's definitely something they want to push for everyone to lean into more," a Disney manager said of AI.

Companies in every industry are racing to adopt AI tools to boost productivity. Disney is going further than many, however. The OpenAI deal makes Disney the first major entertainment company to invest in the AI juggernaut, and allows its beloved characters to be used in the video generator Sora.

This reflects Disney's long tradition of merging innovation and entertainment, dating back to its founder, Walt.

Three of the eight Disney employees who spoke with Business Insider expressed concerns about using AI, specifically that it could replace humans and threaten job security.

The high-level employee with direct knowledge of Disney's AI strategy said that while AI is a "top priority," it isn't a cure-all. It can make mistakes and lacks a "personalized touch" that people provide, they said.

"If you use AI everywhere, it's going to be counterproductive," this person said, adding that tasks still need human creativity.

Disney spokespeople didn't respond to several requests for comment on its internal AI efforts.

On an internal Disney website explaining its AI policy and tools, the company said it employs a "responsible and human-centric approach to using AI."

"That means humans are, and will remain, the creative engine of the company," Disney said on the site. "We believe, fundamentally, that human creativity and curiosity are immense and unique — and are at the heart of Disney."

"Simultaneously, our consistent embrace of new technologies has been a key part of empowering our creators and maintaining our leadership in creativity and innovation," the company continued in its "Responsible AI Use" section.

How Disney employees use and see AI

Seven of the eight Disney staffers Business Insider interviewed have tried or regularly use DisneyGPT or Copilot, which is integrated into employees' email accounts and documents. Many use those AI tools for simple, routine tasks, like writing emails.

Disney has a portal on its website that outlines its AI policy and lists Disney-approved AI tools. Two employees said the company has pointed staffers to AI education or compliance training courses.

Some unsanctioned AI tools like Anthropic's Claude can be more effective than Disney-approved AI tools, three staffers said.

One employee at Disney-owned ESPN said their manager told them they could use personal accounts on non-approved AI chatbots for work.

"I'm just using a personal account because Disney isn't allowing us to use these tools yet," the ESPN employee said.

The staffer with direct knowledge of Disney's AI efforts said leadership had tried to make communications about AI "clear across the board," but acknowledged that workers might not "understand the implications" of data security risks that could arise from using unsanctioned AI tools. Some staffers told Business Insider it was hard for them to keep up with the availability and restrictions on various AI tools.

While some Disney employees expressed mixed feelings about AI, the more bullish among them said Disney was wise to strike a deal with OpenAI.

"This type of a partnership at least establishes the precedent for getting paid," the ESPN employee said.

A Disney ads employee said they believed Disney's deal with OpenAI would "pay off" and "be massive" in five to 10 years, even if there are growing pains.

"Disney is smart to push into this," this staffer said. "They are setting the rules of the game, or at least trying."

• Apple's App Store is a huge and increasingly important money maker
• Lawsuits and regulatory challenges have tried to change the way the store works for years
• Now that might — might — finally be happening. If it does, it's a big deal.

When you spend a dollar at Apple's App Store, up to 30 cents of that goes to Apple.

Now, a US court ruling may change that radically — opening up a future where Apple collects almost none of the money users spend on apps.

Emphasis on may: Developers and regulators have been complaining about Apple's App Store fees for years. And while they've won some battles, Apple has been able to keep its business more or less intact — which is a big reason Apple's services business, a core part of the company's financial machinery, has kept growing even as iPhone sales sputtered.

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney, Apple's most committed opponent on this front, says this time is different. Sweeney, whose company makes the (still) popular Fortnite game, intentionally broke Apple's App Store rules in 2020, which got Fortnite kicked off iPhones and started a legal brawl that's still working its way through the courts.

He thinks a new ruling from a federal appeals court is the one that will fundamentally change the way Apple's App Store works. The big takeaway: While Apple was previously forced to let developers like Sweeney tell Apple users they could buy things (like game credits) directly from a developer instead of using Apple's App store, Apple was still charging a 27% fee on those transactions — meaning there was little practical reason for anyone to do it, since the fee was nearly the same on Apple's seamless iOS platform. Now the court is saying that fee is a "prohibitive commission," and says it should be scrapped.

What replaces it? We don't know: The court ruling suggests that Apple and Epic try to work something out. And failing that, a court will do it.

But in Sweeney's eyes, the ruling makes it clear that Apple will only be able to charge a truly minimal fee if someone wants to buy something outside of its App Store, given that it's not likely to incur any meaningful costs when people buy something off-site.

On a press call Thursday night, I pushed Sweeney to try to guesstimate what that fee might be. He ended up with something like this math: An app that generated $1 million in annual revenue might generate costs of up to "several thousand dollars" for Apple; passing along those costs to consumers would mean something like less than 1%.

So: If Apple's fees on transactions that happen outside its App Store are truly capped at a tiny number and lots of developers and users start to take advantage of that — meaning lots of users start spending money on iPhone apps outside of Apple's iOS ecosystem — then this could be a very big deal for Apple, developers, and users. It would deprive Apple of a crucial revenue stream, and either give developers more money or users lower prices (or some combination of both).

So far, Wall Street seems unfazed: Apple stock is more or less unchanged since the court's ruling was released late Thursday afternoon, presumably because investors expect the fight to keep going via an Apple appeal. (I've asked Apple for comment.)

There's also a question of whether normal people who buy things for apps — mainly games — on iPhones want to spend time and energy buying things for those apps on other platforms, even if they can save money.

On his press call Thursday night, Sweeney acknowledged that so far most developers haven't followed Epic's lead and aggressively pushed the idea of off-platform purchases, which he says is due to "fear that Apple will retaliate against them."

Entirely possible. But it's also possible that a meaningful number of developers and users just don't want to deal with extra hassle, and are willing to eat costs for convenience.

If this really is a turning point, you'll see it when the stuff you buy in apps gets cheaper or comes with better rewards. We're not there yet.

• Amazon Prime Video introduced AI-powered TV show recaps in November.
• Fans of "Fallout" spotted inaccuracies in its AI recap of season one.
• The company then removed the feature from its platform.

Given the length of time it can take for the new season of your favorite TV show to come out, it's understandable that you might want a little video recap of what's happened so far.

Ideally, that recap is accurate.

Fans of Amazon's hit show "Fallout" said that wasn't the case in its AI-made synopsis of season one, released ahead of the hit show's new season next week. Fans quickly spotted factual errors, and Amazon Prime Video took down the recap.

One Redditor said the AI feature told viewers that a flashback featuring the Ghoul (one of the main characters, played by Walton Goggins) took place in the 1950s instead of 2077.

An X user posted that the recap also mischaracterized the agreement the Ghoul and Lucy MacLean (played by Ella Purnell) made in the "Fallout" finale.

Instead of saying the pair is teaming up to find Lucy's father, the recap said the Ghoul gave Lucy an ultimatum: "die or join him."

Amazon first launched its Video Recap, a feature that allows users to catch up on Prime Original TV shows between seasons, for beta testing in November.

"Video Recaps use AI to identify a show's most important plot points, combining them with synchronized voice narration, dialogue snippets, and music to create a visual summary that prepares viewers for the new season," the company said in a press release at the time.

The TV shows that Amazon said were undergoing Video Recaps testing — "Jack Ryan," "Upload," "Bosch," and "The Rig" — did not include the feature at the time of writing.

Representatives for Amazon did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Like so many companies, Amazon is investing heavily in AI.

During the company's February earnings call, Chief Finance Officer Brian Olsavsky said that 2025 capital expenditures could reach over $100 billion, with the majority of it going toward AI and Amazon Web Services, its cloud computing platform.

Many of Amazon's consumer services have integrated AI to enhance user engagement and experience, such as product suggestions and helping shoppers on its online platform find clothes that fit. In February, Amazon unveiled Alexa+, the next generation of Alexa, which is powered by generative AI to make it more conversational and personalized for users.

Embracing AI at Amazon, though, hasn't been without growing pains. In October, the company cited AI as it announced it would lay off 14,000 staff members.

"This generation of AI is the most transformative technology we've seen since the internet, and it's enabling companies to innovate much faster than ever before (in existing market segments and altogether new ones)," Beth Galetti, Amazon's senior vice president of people experience and technology, wrote in a blog post at the time.

In an internal message to the remaining staff, Amazon Vice President of Device Software and Services Tapas Roy asked them to "lean in on AI."

"Moving forward, we remain focused on our mission to help product teams launch delightful products," Roy wrote. "In support of this mission, I encourage you all to: Focus on the work that most directly impacts our customers, lean in on Al to enhance your effectiveness, [and] raise your hand when you see opportunities to simplify or eliminate unnecessary processes."

• A Chanel bag masquerading as a shopping cart sold for a record $152,000 at a Christie's auction.
• It's the most ever spent on a Chanel bag — but far from the most expensive handbag ever sold at auction.
• The booming luxury resale market is expected to grow three times as fast as the firsthand market.

It's not just grocery prices that are high — it's also the shopping baskets, or at least some of them.

A Chanel handbag cosplaying as a grocery basket sold for $152,400 at auction on Thursday, breaking brand records.

The piece — the rare, runway silver and black lambskin leather shopping basket bag from 2014 — sold for more than 10 times its low estimate of $15,000 at the online auction from Christie's.

That's a lot of money, but far from the most expensive handbag ever sold.

In July, Hermès' original Birkin bag — worn by Jane Birkin, herself — sold for $10.1 million, becoming the most valuable handbag ever sold at auction. The iconic purse went to a private collector in Japan, who phoned in and won a 10-minute bidding war.

While items selling for millions, or even six figures, may be rare, the luxury resale market is booming.

The secondhand fashion and luxury market is expected to reach $317 billion by 2027, according to a McKinsey report published last month, and it's growing three times as fast as the firsthand market. Secondhand luxury retailers like The RealReal and Fashionphile have recorded double-digit revenue growth this year.

Most luxury resale shoppers are turning to the market to find more affordable options, particularly as handbags from some of the biggest names have experienced significant price hikes over the past few years.

Chanel is one of the worst offenders. The price of its iconic flap bag nearly doubled between 2019 and 2024. This year, the brand increased prices again, hiking those of about 21% of its products by 5% in February, according to research from Citi. Add Trump's tariffs to the mix, and luxury handbags are more expensive than ever.

That said, it's not all deals on the secondhand market. Some savvy shoppers are treating luxury resale as an investment opportunity. Bags from Chanel sold for as much as 30% over their retail value on The RealReal last year.

Classic handbags from brands like Louis Vuitton and Hermès tend to hold their value for years. Some of the most coveted handbags even sell for more on the secondhand market.

• Travis Kelce said in his podcast "New Heights" that he and Taylor Swift never argue.
• During the podcast, the brothers asked George Clooney about how he also never argues with Amal.
• I, on the other hand, fight with my partner regularly and we've been together for 30 years.

As a happily married amateur matchmaker who has helped fix up 30 marriages and was set up with my own miraculous mat, I have rooted for Taylor and Travis's inspiring relationship from the start.

Whether they're confirming their mutual support for each other's work, showing kindness to their doormen and drivers, or giving to charity, I find the adorable, winning couple to be excellent role models.

Yet I admit the Kansas City Chiefs' recent claim that they never fight set me off.

Fighting can be healthy

First, they've only been together for two years, most of it long-distance, during her almost two-year "Eras" tour spanning 149 shows across five continents, while Travis played a total of 31 regular-season games in the last two seasons, not to mention the hours spent in training, recovery, and travelling to see each other.

It's amazing they had time to share a dance onstage, grab dinner, "knock on wood," and do a few cute podcasts together.

Then George Clooney co-opted the conversation by confessing that he and Amal have never had an argument in their 10-year marriage.

As a bestselling author of books my family hates and writing professor in a successful union with someone I adore for 30 years, I felt like screaming: "That's the opposite of a healthy message to give your children, friends, and fans!"

To leave Hollywood fantasy for a truly fulfilling and realistic connection, it's crucial to be able to speak up, disagree with your partner, express yourself amiably, and still feel cherished and appreciated. Otherwise, you're encouraging your partner to keep quiet, repressing their needs and longings to avoid any contention.

I fight with my partner all the time

Indeed, my beloved and I have combative words daily, whether it's me pushing him to hurry up and get ready (he's always late) or him admonishing me to slow the hell down (I tend to be Type A and early), or barking at him to "clean up his damn clutter" motivating him to snarl that I need to stay out of his den and leave his stacks of books, DVDS, and papers lining the floor and tables alone, where they belong.

Of course, we try not to raise our voices, swear, criticize, or call each other names — although a stray "slob," "control freak," and "screw you" have been known to surface in the swirl of passion. Afterward, having honestly expressed our displeasure, we return to our otherwise fairly harmonious existence.

My parents also fought often

I grew up overly sensitive with a tough, brilliant doctor father and three science-brain brothers in the Midwest who trashed my opinions, liberal platitudes, and poetry. Instead of cowering under their constant criticisms, I learned to yell, "Go chew on yourself," and became a prolific writer, probably as a way to amplify my views and talk without being interrupted. The friction taught me the toughness I later needed to conquer a big city, carry on two careers, and hold my own in a long marriage to a high-powered, hilarious, albeit stubborn urbanite.

My parents, blissfully besotted for 64 years in Michigan with four kids and five grandkids, quarreled often and well.

Once, when they had friends over for dinner, and my mother disagreed with his political stance, Dad made the mistake of responding by muttering, "Stick to your dishes." She looked him in the face and replied, "You didn't tell me that when I was working to put you through medical school for seven years!" which shut him up immediately. He soon apologized profusely, as he should have.

Luckily, Kylie Kelce, Taylor's soon-to-be sister-in-law, got real by leaping right into the fray. Talking about her and Jason, her husband and the father of her four little kids, she confessed, "We absolutely argue."

Asking brides to "love, cherish, and obey" their grooms entered traditional wedding vows in 1594, and this is now considered completely outdated. In fact, if you want your union to last, you have to love, cherish, and argue all the way down the aisle.

Susan Shapiro, an award-winning writing professor, is the bestselling author of the books "Five Men Who Broke My Heart" and "The Forgiveness Tour."

• Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released new images from Jeffrey Epstein's estate.
• Photos feature Bill Gates, President Donald Trump, Richard Branson, and other notable individuals.
• The images are part of 95,000 photos that the Democrats say were provided to the committee.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee on Friday released never-before-seen images from the estate of late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, including some images featuring powerbrokers like Bill Gates and Larry Summers.

The photos — which also feature President Donald Trump, ex-Trump advisor Steve Bannon, former President Bill Clinton, writer-director Woody Allen, Richard Branson, and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew — are a selection of the over 95,000 photos that the Democrats say were provided to the House Oversight Committee pursuant to a subpoena.

Some of the photos also include Ghislaine Maxwell, a onetime partner of Epstein who was convicted of trafficking girls to him for sex. She's currently serving a 20-year prison sentence.

The committee previously released other records obtained from Epstein's estate, including images of his US Virgin Islands home and tens of thousands of emails and text messages between Epstein and other powerful people.

The images themselves aren't indications of wrongdoing.

In many cases, it isn't clear when the photos were taken. Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting an underage girl for prostitution and agreed to register as a pedophile. In 2019, he killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial on more severe sex-trafficking charges from federal prosecutors.

The House Oversight Committee's ranking member, Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia of California, said in a statement: "These disturbing photos raise even more questions about Epstein and his relationships with some of the most powerful men in the world."

Representatives for Gates, Summers, Bannon, Clinton, Allen, Branson, and Mountbatten-Windsor did not immediately respond to requests for comment by Business Insider.

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told Business Insider in a statement that House Democrats are once again "selectively releasing cherry-picked photos with random redactions to try and create a false narrative."

The latest release of images comes as the Department of Justice readies to release a trove of Epstein-related documents. The Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by Trump, requires the Justice Department to make its files related to Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell public by December 19.

"The Trump Administration has done more for Epstein's victims than Democrats ever have by repeatedly calling for transparency, releasing thousands of pages of documents, and calling for further investigations into Epstein's Democrat friends," Jackson said.

Below are some of the 19 images that Democrats on the House Oversight Committee published on Friday:

A smiling Richard Branson is seen here in a tropical setting with Jeffrey Epstein

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers is seen on a private jet alongside Woody Allen

Bill Gates is pictured smiling next to one of Epstein's pilots, Larry Visoki

Longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon is seen sitting across a desk from Epstein

Another image shows Gates alongside Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew

A photo of President Donald Trump surrounded by women with redacted faces was among the images released

Another image shows Epstein standing next to Woody Allen on what appears to be a movie set

A photo signed by Bill Clinton depicts the former president with Maxwell and Epstein.

• Relocating for work was exciting when my husband and I were newly married.
• Having children shifted our priorities, leading us to choose stability over new opportunities.
• We decided that giving our children roots was more important than living in new cities or countries.

By our fifth wedding anniversary, my husband and I had moved twice for his job. We were in our 20s and excited for new experiences. It was easy to embrace the chaos of moving then.

When a third opportunity to relocate was presented, the choice wasn't so easy anymore. Our family had grown; we now had a baby to consider. This move would take us from Houston to California, a place we'd barely visited. The whole idea felt exciting, but what would it be like to move halfway across the country with a baby in tow?

Having a baby made us think differently about moving

We asked ourselves what advice we'd give our child if she were an adult making this decision. We realized we'd encourage her to take the chance, so we decided we would, too.

My husband's employer provided us with a moving company to pack, load, and transport our belongings. Unfortunately, the truck had a blowout on I-10 and was delayed, so when we arrived in California, we were without many of the comforts that make life with a baby easier for longer than we'd planned.

The beginning was rough, but it worked out. We embraced having mountains and beaches close by, but what we couldn't embrace was the cost of living. To afford to live where we were, I'd need to go back to work. However, we'd created a little obstacle; I was pregnant. We didn't know if we could afford to live in California with our expanding family, but we knew of a place we could afford.

When our family changed, our reason to move changed

Two and a half years after we arrived in California, we were on the move again. This relocation took us back to Houston. Thankfully, my husband's company provided moving assistance once more.

Moving while pregnant and with a 3-year-old was exhausting, but we settled into our new house and our new life. Once we hit the milestone of two and a half years in our home, we celebrated.

A few months later, my husband was asked to consider applying for another opportunity. The position was outside the United States, and if he applied, it would mean we were OK with moving abroad. But were we?

For our move to California, we'd asked ourselves what advice we'd give our children. Now the question was: what life did we want to give our children?

We decided to give our children roots instead of adventures

Despite the benefits and experiences that come with living as expatriates, providing our children with stable and predictable childhoods was a bigger priority for us. We chose to have our adventures during school vacations instead of having an adventure-based life.

My husband did not apply for that overseas position and chose not to apply to any other jobs that would require us to relocate. We've now been in our second Houston house for 16 years. Moving was fun for a while, but we're thankful we were able to stay in one place after the fun wore off.

And if our children ever ask us for advice on moving, will we stick with our original, hypothetical answer? I think we would.