Judge defeats Musk’s ex, dismisses lawsuit accusing advertisers of illegal boycott

A US judge on Thursday dismissed X Corp’s antitrust lawsuit, which had accused the World Federation of Advertisers and major companies including Mars, CVS Health and Colgate-Palmolive of illegally boycotting billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk’s social media company.

U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle in federal court in Dallas said X failed to show it suffered any harm under federal antitrust laws.

company lawsuitFiled in 2024, it says advertisers, working through a World Federation of Advertisers initiative called the Global ⁠Alliance for Responsible Media, collectively withheld “billions of dollars of advertising revenue” from X, formerly known as Twitter.

Ax and the World Federation of Advertisers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The lawsuit claimed that advertisers acted against their own economic interests in a conspiracy against the platform, which violated US antitrust law.

CVS and the other defendants had denied any wrongdoing and had urged Boyle to dismiss the lawsuit. They argued that X failed to show that they acted in concert rather than making individual business decisions about when and where to spend advertising dollars.

⁠The companies sued in court, saying ⁠advertisers independently chose rival platforms due to concerns about

Boyle wrote in his order that “the nature of the alleged conspiracy does not state an antitrust claim, and therefore the Court has no objection to dismissing it with prejudice.”

defrauded shareholders

Musk’s takeover and sometimes turbulent management of Twitter has sparked litigation.

Musk has also sued Media Matters for America after the liberal advocacy group’s 2023 report highlighted examples of anti-Semitic content appearing next to ads for blue chip companies like Apple and Oracle.

Ax alleged that Media Matters manipulated algorithms on the platform to create images of advertisers’ paid posts next to inflammatory content. The case is going on.

Last week a US federal jury Musk found liable over claims he defrauded Twitter shareholders By trying to drive down the social media company’s share price so it can renegotiate or back out of a $44 billion US acquisition in 2022.

On Thursday, a lawyer for Musk urged a federal judge to review that verdict, saying jurors used the verdict improperly to “send a message” by finding him liable.

In a letter filed Thursday in San Francisco federal court, Musk’s attorney Alex Spiro also accused jurors of “mocking” his client by writing the number “$4.20” in bright blue on the verdict form, although the remaining entries were written in black.

The number 420 is associated with marijuana culture. Musk, the world’s richest man, has frequently mentioned the 420 in interviews and tweets and has used it in commercial activities for his various companies.

Musk valued Twitter, now known as X, at $54.20 US per share in his $44 billion US buyout.

Spiro said the jury’s “numerical mockery” was “undoubtedly intentional”, and when combined with other alleged trial errors called into question the March 20 verdict, where damages could have reached US$2.5 billion. He said it required “further investigation” by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who oversees the case.

“The inescapable conclusion from looking at the verdict is that the jury chose to use its verdict to send a message to Mr. Musk, rather than properly discharge its solemn duty to render a fair verdict,” Spiro wrote.

---

Frank Bottini and Mark Molumphy, two attorneys for the investors, said in a joint statement that Spiro’s letter was without merit.

Bottini and Molemphy said, “It is unfortunate that Musk has again decided to criticize the court and jury rather than take accountability for his conduct.” “Given the overwhelming evidence presented at trial, it is not easy to strike down an extremely diligent jury simply for doing its job.”

Jurors found Musk liable for two statements he made shortly after the buyout was announced, where he questioned whether Twitter was overrun with fake and spam accounts, known as bots. They did not find him liable for the third statement about the bots or for planning the fraud.

Twitter investors said Musk criticized the company in an attempt to force it to renegotiate its offer, or let them back out. He said Musk’s comments hurt Twitter’s stock price, causing him to lose money when he sold his shares at a lower price.