California Observer

Twitter Instructed by Judge to Hand Over Documents

Image Source: Esquire

Due to Twitter’s unwillingness to give him accurate information on the number of spam and bot accounts on the platform, Musk attempted to withdraw his $44 billion bid to buy the social media business. Musk described this as his justification.

The new order issued on Monday requires Twitter to now provide documentation from Kayvon Beykpour, the former general manager of consumer products at the business who was a significant contributor to the spam report that Musk was handed when he initially tried to acquire the firm back in April.

Earlier this month, after a string of Tweets from the business magnate, suggested that, under the right circumstances, the acquisition would still go through, Musk changed his tune once more about his decision to withdraw from his attempt to buy Twitter.

Musk said that the “transaction should go” as long as Twitter could give him the information he’s been looking for in response to a Tweet that pointed out that Twitter purportedly utilized a “fake data set” to estimate the amount of spam and bot accounts on the platform.

Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal was then challenged to a “public debate” regarding the “bot proportion” by Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who subsequently escalated his position.

In a direct manner, Musk said, “Let him prove to the world that Twitter has 5% phony or spam everyday users.”

In response to Twitter’s purported inability to adequately disclose what proportion of users were bots and spam accounts, Musk withdrew his proposal, according to an SEC filing. According to his attorney, Twitter’s first agreement with the corporation was broken because the company was unable to carry out this request.

According to Brett Taylor, the chairman of the Twitter board, the firm intends to sue Musk to compel him to finish the transaction.

Legal showdown between Musk and Twitter

New court documents that were made public at the beginning of August revealed that Twitter had subpoenaed documents from Morgan Stanley and other banks as well as Musk’s advisors to use in its trial against the billionaire, which is when the legal dispute between Elon Musk and the social media giant really got going.

Twitter has contacted a number of financial institutions in the hopes that they may provide information about Musk’s interactions with the banks and the funding of his buyout plan. These financial institutions include Bank of America, Barclays, BNP Paribas, and Citigroup.

Also included by the subpoenas is any communication that may have taken place regarding how the Twitter acquisition may impact Tesla, the company Musk is the CEO of.

Twitter’s request to expedite the Musk v. Twitter trial until October 2022 was granted by a judge on July 19, following the judge’s favorable ruling.

Read Also: Twitter v. Musk takeover trial set for October 

Musk had pushed for a trial to begin in February 2023, claiming that he needed more time to get answers to his unanswered questions concerning spam and bot accounts. He also claimed that the additional seven months were required to do a thorough study.

In Delaware’s Chancery Court, Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick stated that postponing the trial “threatens irreparable harm to [Twitter].”

The trial has been set to last a five-day period. In addition, Musk’s initial proposal contained a provision stating that if he decided to end the contract before it was fully implemented, a $1 billion cost would be assessed.

The amount of money at stake doesn’t seem to worry Musk, who frequently tweets jokes and memes while treating the situation lightly.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Opinions expressed by California Observer contributors are their own.