Musk's X loses case accusing advertisers of illegal boycott
What's the story
A US judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk's social media platform, X. The company had accused several major advertisers and corporations of illegally boycotting its services. US District Judge Jane Boyle ruled that X Corp failed to prove any harm under federal competition laws. The case was originally filed in 2024 in Texas after the platform witnessed a drop in ad revenue following Musk's acquisition of Twitter (now X) in 2022.
Legal battle
Defendants denied any wrongdoing
The lawsuit alleged that companies like Unilever, Mars, Orsted, and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) conspired to deprive X Corp of billions in ad revenue. However, CVS Health and other defendants denied any wrongdoing. They argued that their decisions about where and when to spend ad dollars were independent business choices rather than a coordinated boycott against X.
Court ruling
Judge states alleged conspiracy 'does not state an antitrust claim'
Judge Boyle agreed with the defendants, stating that the alleged conspiracy did not constitute an antitrust claim. She noted that WFA initiative called Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) "did not buy advertising space from X to sell to advertisers nor did it, in such an arrangement, tell X not to sell directly to GARM's customers." The judge concluded by saying she had no qualm dismissing with prejudice stating that the alleged conspiracy "does not state an antitrust claim."
Additional details
'Companies withheld ad spending,' claims X Corp
X Corp claimed that the accused companies withheld ad spending by adhering to safety standards set by GARM. GARM was formed in 2019 with the goal of creating standardized frameworks for identifying harmful content like hate speech and misinformation. Participation was voluntary, and many platforms adopted these frameworks as a "brand safety floor." Notably, X itself was also a member of GARM.