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

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.'

Read more of this story at Slashdot.