Elon Musk’s X Sues Twitch and Advertisers Over Alleged Boycott
Table of Contents
Introduction
In a dramatic escalation of its legal conflict with advertisers, Elon Musk’s X platform, formerly known as Twitter, has added Amazon-owned Twitch as a defendant in an amended lawsuit. The complaint accuses Twitch and other major advertisers of colluding to orchestrate a collective boycott that allegedly deprived X of billions in advertising revenue. This move signals Musk’s commitment to pursuing his claims against advertisers who, he believes, unfairly targeted the platform.
Background of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit, originally filed in August 2023, centered on allegations against members of the Global Alliance of Responsible Media (GARM), a now-defunct initiative previously overseen by the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA). According to the complaint, GARM members acted in concert to withdraw significant ad spending from Twitter between late 2022 and early 2023, resulting in substantial financial harm to the platform.
The WFA’s CEO, Stephan Loerke, has publicly denied these allegations, asserting that the organization fully complies with competition laws. In August, Loerke expressed confidence that the courts would vindicate the WFA’s activities. Despite these denials, X’s lawsuit highlights what it considers a coordinated effort by advertisers to undermine the platform.
Unilever’s Removal and Twitch’s Inclusion
Initially, the lawsuit named several prominent companies as defendants, including consumer goods giant Unilever. However, in October 2023, Unilever was dropped from the case after reaching an undisclosed agreement with X. The nature of the agreement remains unclear, but the platform announced via its @XNews account that it would continue its partnership with Unilever.
Twitch, the streaming service owned by Amazon, has since been added as a defendant in the amended lawsuit. The complaint alleges that Twitch, alongside other advertisers such as Mars, Ørsted, and CVS Health, abruptly ceased its advertising purchases on Twitter between November and December 2022. The lawsuit contends that this sudden shift in behavior represents a coordinated action designed to harm X financially.
Legal and Business Implications
The inclusion of Twitch underscores Musk’s resolve to challenge what he views as anticompetitive practices in the advertising industry. X argues that the boycott was not merely a collection of independent decisions but a deliberate and unlawful conspiracy among GARM members.
This case has far-reaching implications, not only for the companies involved but also for the broader digital advertising ecosystem. Should Musk succeed in proving his claims, the outcome could reshape how advertisers collaborate and interact with social media platforms.
Next Steps and Statements
As of now, neither X nor Twitch has issued public comments on the amended lawsuit. The case is expected to progress in court over the coming months, drawing significant attention from legal experts, advertisers, and social media observers alike. The core question remains whether X can substantiate its claims of collusion, a task that will likely require detailed evidence of coordinated actions among the defendants.
For now, the spotlight remains firmly on Musk’s X as it seeks to navigate this complex and high-stakes legal battle.