Elon Musk’s X is making a notable change to its Terms of Service: the company is formally spelling out that it still claims ownership of the “Twitter” trademark.
The update arrives after a Virginia-based startup, Operation Bluebird, filed an application to trademark the term “Twitter.” The startup argues that X effectively abandoned the Twitter brand when it rebranded the social platform to “X.” In a petition submitted to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on December 2, Operation Bluebird pointed to Musk’s July 23, 2023 post saying the service would soon “bid adieu to the twitter brand” as evidence that the old branding had been left behind.
X is pushing back hard. In its own legal filing, the company says it continues to exclusively own the Twitter and Tweet trademarks, along with the recognizable bluebird logo. The dispute highlights a key reality of modern branding: changing a product’s name doesn’t automatically mean a company has surrendered valuable trademarks—especially when those marks still carry enormous public recognition and commercial value.
Meanwhile, Operation Bluebird has been gathering interest for a potential new social platform, collecting sign-ups on a site using the “Twitter” name. The effort is being led by two lawyers: founder Michael Peroff, based in Illinois, and Stephen Coates, who previously worked as a trademark lawyer at Twitter. Their legal backgrounds have fueled speculation that the campaign may be less about building a true competitor to X and more about gaining control of a high-value trademark.
X appears determined not to take any chances. Its revised Terms of Service—set to take effect on January 15, 2026—now explicitly warns users that they have no right to use the X name or the Twitter name, or any related trademarks, logos, domain names, or other brand features, unless they have written permission from the company.
That language is a shift from earlier versions of the terms, which referenced only “X” and did not explicitly mention “Twitter” in this section. By adding Twitter back into the legal framework, X is reinforcing its position that the Twitter brand assets remain protected and controlled by the company, even if the consumer-facing product is called X.
Alongside the trademark-related wording, the updated terms also include smaller changes, such as references related to European Union laws and generated content. X’s Privacy Policy was updated as well, adding a couple of mentions tied to age assurance technology.
The end result is a clear signal: even as X continues to move forward under its new name, the company is still treating “Twitter” and its related branding as valuable intellectual property worth defending.
