X sued Operation Bluebird on Dec. 16 in Delaware federal court to prevent the startup from canceling Twitter-related trademarks and using the name for a new site called twitter.new. Bluebird argues X abandoned the Twitter mark after the 2022 rebrand, while X says the brand remains in active use and is protected. Legal experts say the dispute will test whether X will defend a brand it publicly moved away from and could determine whether Operation Bluebird can commercially use the Twitter name even if a cancellation succeeds.
X Files Lawsuit to Block Startup's Bid to Reclaim the 'Twitter' Name for "twitter.new"
The new logos for X and Twitter are seen in an illustration created on July 24, 2023.
X Corp. — the company behind the social platform now known as X — filed a federal lawsuit in Delaware on Dec. 16 to stop a startup, Operation Bluebird, from canceling trademarks tied to the Twitter name and using them for a new service called twitter.new.
Operation Bluebird petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office earlier in December seeking cancellation of marks associated with the Twitter brand. Bluebird argues that X effectively abandoned the Twitter identity after Elon Musk’s 2022 acquisition and rebranding, clearing the way for the startup to revive and reuse the name.
"The TWITTER brand is alive and well, owned by X Corp., and is not ripe for the picking," the Dec. 16 complaint says. "Despite Bluebird’s purported plan, it cannot bring Twitter 'back'—Twitter never left and continues to be exclusively owned by X Corp."
Musk purchased Twitter in 2022 for $44 billion and subsequently began rebranding the service as X. In 2023 he wrote on the platform that the company would "bid adieu to the Twitter brand and, gradually, all the birds." Despite that public position, X's suit says millions of users still reach the platform through the twitter.com domain, people and businesses continue to refer to the service as Twitter, and X actively maintains and enforces Twitter-related trademarks.
Operation Bluebird founder Michael Peroff told Reuters that the startup’s cancellation petition "is based on well-established trademark law, and we believe we will be successful. We are prepared to take this as far as we need to in order to achieve our goal."
"X legally abandoned the TWITTER mark, publicly declared the Twitter brand 'dead,' and spent substantial resources establishing a new brand identity," said Stephen Coates, a former Twitter trademark lawyer who now serves as Bluebird's general counsel. "They said goodbye. We say hello."
Independent trademark attorney Josh Gerben, not involved in the dispute, called Bluebird’s challenge "an interesting test as to whether or not X will invest in protecting a brand that they no longer want to use." Legal observers note that if X truly abandoned use of the marks, it could face hurdles defending them; conversely, even if the USPTO cancels some registrations, X might still be able to block commercial uses by arguing continued consumer recognition and enforcement rights.
The case highlights a legal tension between public rebranding and the continued commercial value of an established name: will X vigorously defend Twitter’s intellectual property rights despite its move to the X identity? The lawsuit is pending in Delaware federal court. Contributing: Reuters. This story originally appeared on USA TODAY.
