Did Elon Musk Let the Twitter Brand Fly Away?

When Elon Musk rebranded Twitter as X, did his rights in the Twitter brand fly away, opening the door for someone else to hatch a new Twitter without his permission?

This issue is currently incubating in federal court in Delaware and at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). Any businesses considering rebranding should watch this case like a hawk because it provides lessons on how to keep an old brand from becoming fair game.

On July 23, 2023, Musk tweeted, “and soon we shall bid adieu to the twitter brand, and, gradually, all the birds.” The next day, X Corp. replaced Twitter’s bluebird logo with “X” and forwarded traffic from Twitter.com to X.com.

A company named “Operation Bluebird” immediately sought to claim the Twitter marks to create a new microblogging social media platform called Twitter.New. On July 25, Michael Peroff, its founder, filed a federal mark registration application for the TWITTER mark, essentially claiming social media services.

Operation Bluebird has not yet launched a usable service. Its website, Twitter.New, only takes requests for usernames.

X Corp. continues to own federal mark registrations for its family of Twitter and Tweet marks. The USPTO cited them as blocking the applications owned by Operation Bluebird. Operation Bluebird recently filed a petition in the USPTO’s internal court to cancel X Corp.’s mark registrations for the Twitter marks, arguing that X Corp. abandoned them when it rebranded to X.

So, did the Twitter bird actually leave Musk’s nest? X Corp. says no. X Corp. sued Operation Bluebird in federal court, seeking a declaratory judgment that it did not abandon the Twitter marks and seeking an injunction stopping Operation Bluebird.

To succeed in cancelling X Corp.’s mark registrations, Operation Bluebird must persuade a court that X Corp. abandoned the Twitter marks. If X Corp.’s federal mark registrations remain in force, they would effectively prevent Operation Bluebird from taking flight.

To prove abandonment, Operation Bluebird must show that X Corp. completely ceased using the Twitter marks to brand its social media services and intended to permanently end use of those marks.

In its federal lawsuit, X Corp. demonstrated many ways in which it continues to use the Twitter marks after transitioning its primary branding to “X.” This includes its continued use of TWITTER branding on Instagram, LinkedIn, and YouTube, on its advertising help pages, and in its marketing communications with customers. This evidence likely proves that X Corp’s rights to the Twitter marks never flew away, so Operation Bluebird will probably lose and never take flight.

Despite the rebranding to “X,” many people continue to refer to X as “Twitter” and call posts “Tweets.” Because of that, even if X Corp. abandoned the Twitter marks, X Corp. may have various claims it can use to stop others from claiming these marks, such as false designation of origin, passing off, and false association.

These types of claims are difficult to win and won’t work for low-notoriety marks. Thus, small and mid-sized businesses are unlikely to be able to use them to stop others from staking rights to abandoned marks.

So, if your business is contemplating rebranding itself or its product, what should it do to keep others from claiming that brand (i.e., that mark) against your will?

The best move is to continue using the old mark but with a lower profile. This continued usage must be where consumers will see it.

For goods, this means continuing to use the mark somewhere and sometimes on the goods, product packaging, displays, or point-of-sale materials. For services, this means continuing to use the mark sometimes in association with providing the services or in advertising them.

If you suspend mark usage for a while, document your intent to revive its use within a reasonable time. Create contemporaneous records showing your intent to resume, such as internal business communications, signed or proposed contracts, product redevelopment plans, marketing plans, and other steps towards product or service relaunch.

Also, understand that owning a federal mark registration by itself doesn’t protect you from losing mark rights if you abandon use of your mark. If you abandon use, your related federal mark registrations can be canceled. That is what Operation Bluebird is trying to do.

Relatedly, you cannot renew a federal mark registration for a mark you have abandoned. Many owners of federal mark registrations mistakenly believe they can keep their mark rights alive by renewing their registrations even if they are no longer using their marks and have no specific plans to relaunch them. That’s illegal under trademark law.

So did the Twitter bird really leave Musk’s nest? Probably not. But the lesson for everyone else is clear: when you rebrand, keep using your old mark publicly somewhere, and document your reasons for temporary stoppages, or a predator may swoop in and fly off with it.

Written on January 21, 2026
by John B. Farmer
© 2026 Leading-Edge Law Group, PLC. All rights reserved.