Judge blocks X rival from using Twitter name, but allows ‘Tweet’ for now

Operation Bluebird originally launched as Twitter.now, a self-described effort to revive the social network that X replaced. The startup’s founders, lawyers Michael Peroff and Stephen Coates, have been open about their goal of acquiring abandoned trademarks from the X rebrand. Coates, a former trademark lawyer at Twitter, argued that X “let go of the bird” and “let go of the tweet.”

In his opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Colm F. Connolly wrote that Bluebird is “likely to succeed in proving both that X Corp. discontinued the bona fide use of the Tweet mark and Bird logo and that it intends not to resume the use of the marks.” The judge granted X’s motion for an injunction on eight other Twitter-related marks but declined to extend it to the two marks the startup now uses.

The court’s decision is not final; the case will continue to determine whether X ultimately retains rights to any of the Twitter marks given its rebrand to X. Meanwhile, Tweet.app is charging users $20 to reserve a handle, a fee the startup says helps cover legal costs. More than 172,000 people requested handles before launch, according to the company. “A tweet was never a corporation. It’s one person saying something,” Coates said in a statement.

Why This Matters

The ruling tests how trademark law handles ‘abandonment’ when a company rebrands and ceases use of iconic marks.
For social media users, the case reflects nostalgia for the original Twitter brand and raises questions about who owns words that pass into everyday language.
The startup’s success could encourage others to pursue abandoned trademarks from large companies, potentially reshaping intellectual property strategy.

Background

X Corp (formerly Twitter Inc.) rebranded to X in July 2023, dropping the Twitter name, bird logo, and the word ‘tweet’ from its official branding. Musk’s company has since used the X logo and calls posts ‘X posts’. Trademark law requires continuous ‘bona fide use’ to maintain a mark; non-use for three consecutive years creates a presumption of abandonment. Operation Bluebird was founded by two lawyers who saw an opportunity to claim the abandoned marks and build a new service on them.

Key Perspectives

X Corp: Argues it still owns all Twitter-related trademarks and that Operation Bluebird is infringing on its intellectual property. It sought a broad injunction to stop the startup from using any of the marks. Operation Bluebird: Claims X abandoned the tweet mark and bird logo, making them available for public use. The startup positions itself as restoring what Musk “threw away.” Critics/Skeptics: Question whether the startup is genuinely building a social network or simply trying to acquire valuable trademarks for profit. The $20 handle fee and founders’ legal backgrounds fuel this suspicion.

What to Watch

The final ruling in the ongoing case, which will determine whether X retains or loses the abandoned marks permanently.
Whether X resumes use of the ‘tweet’ word or bird logo even in a minor capacity to avoid abandonment.
User adoption of Tweet.app — whether nostalgia for Twitter translates into a viable, paid social network.

ZOTPAPER