Operation Bluebird, a startup based in Virginia, launched a new social platform at twitter.now on Monday and said Elon Musk’s X Corp had already abandoned rights tied to the Twitter name.
The company’s website states: “There was once a platform the whole world talked about. The world’s richest man bought it and destroyed it. We’re a small team rebuilding Twitter on a foundation of trust.”
A trademark fight built around non-use
Operation Bluebird’s argument centers on a key principle in U.S. trademark law: a trademark can be presumed abandoned if it has not been used for three consecutive years. Musk formally changed Twitter’s name to X in July 2023 and dropped the long-running blue bird logo, putting the three-year mark in July 2026.
The startup said it began taking action in 2025. It filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, seeking cancellation of Twitter trademarks held by X Corp, and also applied for a new “Twitter” trademark for itself.
X Corp sued to stop the relaunch
X Corp sued Operation Bluebird on Dec. 16, 2025, in a case styled X Corp. v. Operation Bluebird. The company asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware for a preliminary injunction aimed at blocking the new Twitter-style service from going live.
At a hearing in April 2026, Judge Colm Connolly gave what was described as a favorable initial view for Operation Bluebird. According to the report, Connolly said in court that X appeared to have abandoned intellectual property claims tied to the word “tweet” and the Twitter bird logo, and that “Twitter” itself might also have been abandoned.
That was enough for Operation Bluebird’s new chief legal officer, Stephen Coates, to treat the moment as a green light. Coates previously held the same role at Twitter before Musk took over the company. He told Ars Technica: “We believe X has abandoned its rights in the Twitter and tweet trademarks.”
Coates added: “We’re a small company, we have investors, we have a product, we’ve waited several months to launch, and we’re not going to wait any longer.”
The platform distances itself from old Twitter and X
The twitter.now website draws a clear line between the new service and Musk’s company. It says: “We are not X, and we are not affiliated with X Corp in any way.” The interface and feature set reportedly resemble older versions of Twitter, including replies and repost-style functions. Early access requires payment.
The service also includes a real-time checking system built on Gemini, with the internal codename Vera, short for “veracity engine.” Operation Bluebird said the tool automatically checks each post.
Coates told Ars Technica the goal was broader than recreating an old interface. “We want to rebuild a safer public square with less harm, one that supports free speech, not freedom of reach, and we don’t want a business model held hostage by harmful or inaccurate viral content,” he said.
Trademark lawyer says the case is far from over
Washington, D.C.-based trademark lawyer Josh Gerben, who has been following the case, told Ars Technica that Operation Bluebird’s claim that X Corp abandoned the Twitter mark is “a viable legal theory,” but not a guaranteed win.
“There’s a certain amount of audacity here, and they’re going to face a full-force response from X,” Gerben said. “It started as a trademark application, and now they’ve actually launched. X Corp is almost certain to respond again. That’s what makes this such an interesting escalation.”
As of now, Judge Connolly has not issued a formal written ruling. X Corp, Musk, and X attorney Andrew Mayo did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The outcome could reach beyond the Twitter name
The dispute is no longer only about who gets to use “Twitter.” If the court ultimately finds that the mark lapsed after three years of non-use, the case could stand as a warning for companies that retire old brands but leave the associated trademarks unused for too long.