Twitter.now launches as court considers X trademark injunction
A group led by former Twitter legal counsel Stephen Coates has launched Twitter.now, a blue-and-bird-branded social network positioned as unaffiliated with Elon Musk’s X. The launch is significant because it revives Twitter’s former name and imagery while a US court considers X’s attempt to stop it through a trademark injunction.
The project, developed by startup Operation Bluebird, argues that X abandoned the Twitter and “tweet” trademarks after rebranding in 2022; a judge’s earlier comments suggested X had not shown credible recent use of some marks, though the case remains unresolved. Access currently requires a one-off $20 “founder” payment, intended to deter bots, and the site uses an early-stage AI fact-checking tool called Vera that has already drawn criticism for incorrectly restricting harmless posts.
- Twitter.now launches despite X’s unresolved trademark challenge.
- Its founders argue X abandoned the old Twitter identity.
- The service costs $20 and includes imperfect AI fact-checking.
New here? Start with this
Twitter was a social network known for short posts called “tweets” and a blue bird logo. In 2022, its owner Elon Musk changed its name to X and introduced new branding.
Stephen Coates, a former Twitter lawyer, leads a group behind Operation Bluebird, the startup developing Twitter.now. It argues that X gave up the old Twitter and “tweet” trademarks when it rebranded; X disputes the attempt to use those marks, and the legal case is still under way.
The dispute matters because trademarks govern who can use a name and branding in business. The court’s decision could affect whether another service can use Twitter’s former identity, while the new site’s paid access and AI moderation tool are part of its early launch.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Operation Bluebird can argue that X’s rebrand and apparent lack of recent use of some marks left the old Twitter name and imagery open to revival, and that trademark law should reflect actual use rather than confer lasting control over a brand a company has left behind. A distinct, clearly unaffiliated service could also give users another social-network option, while the court can resolve any remaining confusion or ownership concerns.
The case against
X can argue that its rights in the Twitter name and imagery may persist despite the rebrand, and that reviving a closely associated brand risks confusing users about who operates the service or whether it is connected to X. Protecting those marks can preserve consumer clarity and the value built around them; the court should determine whether X abandoned them before another company uses them commercially.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Engadget as “There’s a new Twitter in town, even though a judge has yet to rule on a trademark injunction”.