Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Social Networks Twitter

Operation Bluebird Wants To Relaunch 'Twitter' For a New Social Network (theverge.com) 81

A startup called Operation Bluebird is petitioning the US Patent and Trademark Office to strip X Corp of the "Twitter" and "tweet" trademarks, hoping to relaunch a new Twitter with the old brand, bird logo, and "town square" vibe. "The TWITTER and TWEET brands have been eradicated from X Corp.'s products, services, and marketing, effectively abandoning the storied brand, with no intention to resume use of the mark," the petition states. "The TWITTER bird was grounded." Ars Technica reports: If successful, two leaders of the group tell Ars, Operation Bluebird would launch a social network under the name Twitter.new, possibly as early as late next year. (Twitter.new has created a working prototype and is already inviting users to reserve handles.)

Michael Peroff, an Illinois attorney and founder of Operation Bluebird, said that in the intervening years, more Twitter-like social media networks have sprung up or gained traction -- like Threads, Mastodon, and Bluesky. But none have the scale or brand recognition that Twitter did prior to Musk's takeover. "There certainly are alternatives," Peroff said. "I don't know that any of them at this point in time are at the scale that would make a difference in the national conversation, whereas a new Twitter really could."

Similarly, Peroff's business partner, Stephen Coates, an attorney who formerly served as Twitter's general counsel, said that Operation Bluebird aims to recreate some of the magic that Twitter once had. "I remember some time ago, I've had celebrities react to my content on Twitter during the Super Bowl or events," he told Ars. "And we want that experience to come back, that whole town square, where we are all meshed in there."
"Mere 'token use' won't be enough to reserve the mark," said Mark Lemley, a Stanford Law professor and expert in trademark law. "Or [X] could defend if it can show that it plans to go back to using Twitter. Consumers obviously still know the brand name. It seems weird to think someone else could grab the name when consumers still associate it with the ex-social media site of that name. But that's what the law says."

Operation Bluebird Wants To Relaunch 'Twitter' For a New Social Network

Comments Filter:
  • by NotEmmanuelGoldstein ( 6423622 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @08:12PM (#65850089)
    Translation: No-one can compete with the Twitter (now X) market-share because of legacy users but we plan to cheat by re-using their former name, logo and trademark.

    As always, the big question is: What can BlueBird offer that is different to Mastodon and BlueSky? What's their market USP? They have to obey the same censorship laws and (eventually) age-restriction laws. They'll be manipulated by the same bots and disinformation networks as Twitter, unless their subscriber's down-vote the propaganda. The only advantage, is a 'guaranteed' user base (via brand recognition) allows them to monetize their product quickly. Since X (formerly Twitter) has market share, they're depending on those legacy users to change to BlueBird for no real benefit.

    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Translation: No-one can compete with the Twitter (now X) market-share because of legacy users but we plan to cheat by re-using their former name, logo and trademark.

      As always, the big question is: What can BlueBird offer that is different to Mastodon and BlueSky? What's their market USP? They have to obey the same censorship laws and (eventually) age-restriction laws. They'll be manipulated by the same bots and disinformation networks as Twitter, unless their subscriber's down-vote the propaganda. The only advantage, is a 'guaranteed' user base (via brand recognition) allows them to monetize their product quickly. Since X (formerly Twitter) has market share, they're depending on those legacy users to change to BlueBird for no real benefit.

      For me, mentions of TheAppFormerlyKnownAsTwitter have pretty much disappeared. News sites no longer quote tweets, friends no longer mention them. The only time I hear about them is when they get another fine for breaking the law or Musk does something else incredibly stupid.

      Social Media itself is dying, but TheAppFormerlyKnownAsTwitter is exemplifying why. Social media has now become beholden to rich people who are using it to try and drown out voices they don't like. Hence people are switching off. It's

      • by Anonymous Coward

        every single day here there are posts the reference content posted on "X" ... just because you have removed yourself doesn't mean a god damn thing.

        • by mjwx ( 966435 )

          every single day here there are posts the reference content posted on "X" ... just because you have removed yourself doesn't mean a god damn thing.

          Here's the thing, I was never a part of Twitter... definitely not a part of the TheAppFormerlyKnownAsTwitter.

          My entire exposure to it from go to woah was via thrid parties... most notably reputable news agencies. As said news agencies care about their reputation, they've stopped quoting it as a source and social media in general. Twitter used to be very well cited, barely a BBC article used to go by without a section of "this is what some random twat on Twitter had to say about it" but that is all gone n

      • A single mod down because someone wanted to silence what they didn't like... Elon, what is your /. user name.
    • A Twitter-branded Mastodon instance might have a decent shot at success just due to the branding advantage, nothing since Twitter has been as well-known as Twitter.

      • A Twitter-branded Mastodon instance

        It'd have to support full-text search by default. Mastodon, last I checked, was still in practice stuck with tags-only search that fails unless both the poster and searcher manage to correctly #GuessTheHashtag. I've read that Mastodon added in version 4.2.0, but I've never got it to work because it's not the default: the posting user has to deliberately seek out how to opt into full-text search [fedi.tips] before sending posts, and the administrator of the searcher's instance has to spend a lot more money for a much la

    • Translation: No-one can compete with the Twitter (now X) market-share because of legacy users but we plan to cheat by re-using their former name, logo and trademark.

      Not quite. There's no reason to believe the new thing won't compete either. Legacy users have auto-migrated to X.

    • How, exactly, is it cheating?

      If the legacy users abandon the X platform because they prefer the branding or "the vibes", then it was fundamentally a mistake on Musk's part to change those things. Recognizing what consumers really want... isn't that the ENTIRE POINT of capitalism?

      People seem to be profoundly opposed to the changes that accompanied the rebranding from Twitter to X, but they seem to have trouble choosing a successor platform en masse. Perhaps reviving the Twitter marks will resolve the issue.

      I

    • by allo ( 1728082 )

      They can annoy Musk by claiming the Twitter trademark.

  • All for it. (Score:2, Informative)

    by abulafia ( 7826 )
    It would just be funny, and that's apparently good enough reason in Musk's view.

    His Nazi bar will always be Xitter to me.

    • It's funny that Musk is literally doing what Torba did with Gab - by disabling 99% of moderation he opened up the platform to hostile state bot farms and basement Nazis (both real and fake).
      • Re:All for it. (Score:5, Informative)

        by abulafia ( 7826 ) on Thursday December 11, 2025 @03:00AM (#65850407)
        Musk's real "innovation" in the category is paying shitposters for engagement, thereby outsourcing the gaslighting. He's literally paying people in developing countries to pretend to be US Americans ranting about keeping out people from developing countries.

        Americans can't even go on our own frothing racist diatribes anymore, we just pay someone else to do it.

        • He's literally paying people in developing countries to pretend to be US Americans ranting about keeping out people from developing countries.

          This is certainly within the realm of possibility but do you have a source? Also, why would he recently release a feature that shows the country of origin for accounts if he was shilling accounts in other countries?

          • by abulafia ( 7826 )
            There an interesting, little-known new tool called "Google" that can help you with such questions [google.com].
            • There's also another interesting thing called Rule 42, which implies that everything exists on some corner of the internet. That includes materials which support your point as well as materials that refute your point. If you don't provide the specific evidence, I could end up finding the weakest evidence of your point as well as potentially stronger counterpoints. But ultimately, if you can't be bothered to provide evidence of your own claims then why do you expect me to do it for you?
              • by abulafia ( 7826 )
                You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them read it.

                That's on the horse, of course.

                • You didn't lead the horse to water. You told it water existed and left it to its own devices to find it.
  • by wickerprints ( 1094741 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @08:16PM (#65850097)

    The problem with all of these platforms is not what what they're called or what they look like, or even how they function for the most part. The so-called "magic" is gone because these services are flooded with inauthentic content and behaviors. Everything is either an advertisement, propaganda, or influencer/AI slop. The signal-to-noise ratio is too low, which drives away genuine contributors and stops new people from joining and gaining critical mass.

    The current state of social media is a reflection of the inability of its users to simultaneously discern what is inauthentic behavior and to free themselves of its effects. If you ask a reasonable person if they actively desire being lied to and manipulated for financial gain, they would say no; but when such deception is packaged in a tantalizing form, they find that not only can they not resist, they don't WANT to resist. Like an addict, they want and embrace the deception, to the point where they get angry at anyone who dares to pull back the curtain. The result is an abundance of weaponized and optimized inauthentic content that is being used to manipulate and monetize.

    So no, bringing back the "Twitter" name and functionality is not going to do anything, because even before it was made into the hellscape that is called X, it was its own special cesspool.

  • by shm ( 235766 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @08:25PM (#65850105)

    This smells of a publicity stunt. If they launch, it will be as Bluebird.

    Anyway we have Bluesky which has some interesting users. Mastodon is just too much work to find and follow interesting people. Like or not, X is where the legacy crowd still is.

  • Poor choice. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @08:31PM (#65850115)

    “Many users continue to refer to X as ‘Twitter’ and posts on X as ‘tweets,’ which demonstrates continued association and strengthens the case for residual goodwill,” [Alexandra Roberts, a professor of law and media at Northeastern University School of Law] says. She points to a 2020 case where a party attempted to register “Aunt Jemima” for breakfast foods, but was rejected “based on a likelihood of confusion” with Quaker Oats’ Aunt Jemima marks, even though the company had announced earlier that year that it was discontinuing the name and logo.

    Beyond this, X has the resources to keep Operation Bluebird in court longer than Operation Bluebird can afford legal representation.

    • I still refer to it as Twitter due to intense "bad will". Specifically, I'm not changing what I call something because a Nazi wants me to.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Beyond this, X has the resources to keep Operation Bluebird in court longer than Operation Bluebird can afford legal representation.

      That comes later. They're trying to get the trademark cancelled - which is made easier with public statements saying Twitter is dead, and Musk posting that it's not Twitter, but X and to stop referring it as such.

      Once the trademark is cancelled, they are free to then register it and then maybe X would be able to sue.

      At best, X could contest the cancellation and registration req

      • At best, X could contest the cancellation and registration request with the USPTO, but it's again going to be hard as X/Musk have done a lot of disavow Twitter.

        Did you not read my post?

        “Many users continue to refer to X as ‘Twitter’ and posts on X as ‘tweets,’ which demonstrates continued association and strengthens the case for residual goodwill,” [Alexandra Roberts, a professor of law and media at Northeastern University School of Law] says.

        But just for you, I'll throw in this:

        Intellectual property attorney Douglas Masters says he is doubtful that Operation Bluebird’s claims will be successful. “I don’t know that the record ultimately will show that even though they [X Corp.] switched to X, that they intended to give up all of their commercial use and rights in the word Twitter,” Masters tells The Verge.

        But hey, I'm sure you know more about trademark law than some legal professor or a practicing lawyer. /s

  • by mysidia ( 191772 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @08:40PM (#65850129)

    That is the way with trademarks. X management has been very clear about stopping to use the name Twitter;
    which means they won't use it anymore, therefore, they have no business continuing to claim a trademark.

    That said the artists who drew the Twitter icon still get the copyright to their Logo and art assets, so another company shouldn't be able to just start using those. They will need to have to have their own art created.

    If Elon really cared about the Twitter mark it would be, or would have been extremely easy; to keep a service Live using the mark.
    Such as a Testbed website for X, for example, or an extra service to still be marketed under the Twitter name.. so called "Token use" wouldn't be sufficient, But you only need to have one actual service still using the branding to prevent it from being "abandoned". You can have a limited service with 100 customers, and still have the rights to your trademark. So If Elon/Twitter/X cares about this in the slightest; they should be able to easily block this proceeding. And you just need to resume use of it within 3 years to avoid it being abandoned under US law. So it's odd for them to petition the trademark office so early.. X can apply a new use of the mark within any schedule they want before that date. The attempt to usurp their IP would easily be blocked if X still cares in the slightest.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I will never call it "X"; it will always be Twitter.

    So, unless I start getting daily nudes akin to the John Gill the Timber Man calendar of the 80s and 90s, it will never be "X".

  • They're talking about Bluesky.

  • They have a name, use that, no legal problems needed.
  • Let's drain the swamp and then refill it with fresh sewage.

  • AI could vibe code up a twitter clone prototype in about 90 seconds. This is NOT an achievement

  • launch you to Mars one way without a helmet if you fuck with his IP

    • All Mars trips that involve landing on Mars will be one way for the foreseeable future. We're likely 200 years away from being able to get someone back from Mars, and that's only if we find a fuel source there.
      • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

        That's more of a matter of budget than technology. We don't have to send the return-fuel on a single big ship, we can send multiple that dock up in orbit over Mars.

  • by ndsurvivor ( 891239 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2025 @11:31PM (#65850309) Journal
    Was that it was authentic, that they had moderators that would weed out BS. They would ban the President if he incited violence. They were decent. If the goal is to bring that back, then count me in.
    • They waited far too long to ban Trump. I left years before January 6. Not that I ever used it much before.

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      No you fucking moron. That's what killed it.

      • I'm not a fan of Twitter's censorship (I think in some ways it did more damage than good), but Twitter wasn't "dead" before Elon bought it. In fact, it was making more revenue at that time. Of course profit matters over revenue, but that's going to be much harder to generate now since the platform makes profits primarily from advertising and companies don't want their branding featured next to unmoderated, unhinged, politically-charged rhetoric. And that doesn't even begin to cover all of the interest th
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I was one of the first people in my circle of friends and colleagues that got onto Facebook. (Back then it was a nice way to reconnect with some far-off relatives etc., and we didn't foresee all the shenanigans that would later come into play.) But since then, I've very scrupulously avoided signing up for more of this crap. No Instagram, no Whatsapp, no Circles, Orkut, Wave, Buzz, G+, Threads, Mastodon, Bluesky, Fairyplaygroundforwankers, and DEFINITELY not Twitter. The rebrand to X did not make me reconsid

  • These laws they are referring to, they are only fooling themselves when they pretend that they might apply to the richest people in the world. It doesn't matter how "clear" one might think trademark laws to be, when the other side can spend more on lawyers than the GDP of many small nations, you don't have a chance of winning.
  • Why is anyone on X?

Modeling paged and segmented memories is tricky business. -- P.J. Denning

Working...