● Covered by 3 sources · 4 reportsMedium impact4 neutral
X Settles Legal Dispute with World Federation of Advertisers, Continues Suit Against Brands
Key points
- X and WFA settled their multiyear legal dispute.
- WFA will discontinue its Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) initiative.
- X is appealing the dismissal of its lawsuit against other advertisers.
- X accused advertisers of an "illegal boycott" after revenue decline.
- A federal court dismissed the initial lawsuit in March 2024.
Settlement Reached with WFA
X Corp. and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) announced on Wednesday that they have settled their multiyear legal battle. This agreement concludes X's lawsuit against the WFA, which X filed in 2024, alleging that the WFA orchestrated a "systematic illegal boycott" of the platform. The settlement aims to reset the relationship between the two organizations.
As part of the settlement, the WFA will discontinue its Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) initiative. GARM was founded in 2019 by WFA members to address digital safety and harmful media environments, which X had claimed led advertisers to avoid the platform.
Background of the Lawsuit
X's lawsuit against the WFA followed a significant decline in advertising revenue after Elon Musk's acquisition of the social network in 2022. X accused the WFA and its members of withholding billions of dollars in ad spending due to concerns over content moderation and brand safety. X alleged that this constituted an antitrust violation and an illegal conspiracy to reduce its revenue, which reportedly dropped by $1.5 billion by the end of 2023.
A federal court dismissed X's lawsuit in March, with the judge stating that X had failed to demonstrate harm under federal competition laws. X had appealed this decision in April.
Continued Litigation Against Other Advertisers
Despite settling with the WFA, X is continuing its legal efforts against other advertisers. X is appealing the district court's dismissal of its lawsuit against companies such as Mars, Incorporated; CVS Health; Nestle; Abbott Laboratories; Colgate-Palmolive; Lego; Pinterest; Tyson Foods; Shell; and Ørsted A/S.
X is urging the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to revive the suit, arguing that the alleged boycott injured X and competition by allowing other social media platforms to charge higher rates. X maintains that the advertisers' actions constituted an "unusually brazen group boycott."
✨ This summary was generated by AI from the outlets' reporting listed below. It is not independently verified and may contain errors — check the original sources. How BrevFeed works →
The daily brief
One email each morning: the day's tech stories, clustered across outlets and summarized. No account needed.
One email a day. Unsubscribe in one click, any time.
Today's brief
Spend a few minutes, get the whole day. Every topic's top stories in one hands-free rundown — listen, watch, or read the transcript.
▶ Play today's brief
New every morning, and the back catalogue is archived by date.
How outlets covered it
X is appealing a district court's dismissal of its lawsuit against several advertisers, accusing them of an illegal boycott, even after settling with the World Federation of Advertisers. The company claims the alleged boycott harmed X and competition, allowing other social media platforms to charge higher rates.
X and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) have settled a lawsuit initiated by X against advertisers following boycotts that led to a $1.5 billion revenue drop for the platform. The settlement concludes a dispute where X alleged antitrust violations by advertisers conspiring to reduce its revenue.
X Corp. and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) have settled a legal dispute, resetting their relationship. X had sued the WFA, alleging an "illegal boycott" due to concerns over content moderation, but a judge dismissed the suit earlier this year.
X and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) have settled their multiyear legal battle concerning advertisers pulling spending from X due to brand safety concerns. The settlement ends X's lawsuit against the WFA, which X had accused of orchestrating an illegal boycott, and includes the WFA discontinuing its Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) initiative.