PieFedX expands lawsuit over advertiser ‘boycott’ to include Lego, Nestlé, Pinterest, and others | TechCrunch
submitted by
moe90techcrunch.com/2025/02/01/x-expands-lawsuit-ove…
techcrunch.com/2025/02/01/x-expands-lawsuit-ove…
Maybe asking advertisers to 'go fuck yourselves' isn't such a bright idea, fuckwit.
You can also have friends if you just pay mercenaries to kidnap them from the street at gunpoint. Many many great friends at any time.
You just know that's going to be exhibit 1 for the defense.
Fucking fascist Nazi man baby doesn't like when advertisers do what he tells them, and then continues to do so when he realizes that was a bad idea.
Reminds me of the guy who was accused by his gf of impregnating her, then refusing to support the child. Went through everything: the lawyers, friends and family who questioned his manhood and unwilling ess to take responsibility for the child, harassment, threats from her friends, etc. finally ended up in court in front of a judge, where he calmly produced a letter from a doctor that had performed a vasectomy on him well before the child could possibly have been conceived, took the win and walked out.
I would pay to watch this rich spoilt man child have to eat his literal words. I'm sure it's screenshotted all over the internet, but his ego won't let him see the truth.
FYI a vasectomy isn’t a 100% guarantee against getting a woman pregnant as it can sometimes heal, even years after.
A DNA test should still have been ordered in that circumstance.
Yeah any judge should have just waited for a paternity test.
They have actually ... themselves?
;-)
Hey, when you're rich you can grab them by the balls.
*corpussy
I’m honestly blown away that Nestle stopped or reduced advertising. It seems like twitter is exactly the home for such a terrible company.
Not if there's fewer there to see ads. They're still a business with a bottom line, even if what they do is terrible.
Yea, fair point.
Less of a boycott and more of a logical business decision.
But you usually pay per click or impression, not a flat rate. So that alone shouldn't be a reason for them to stop advertising there
The company might be terrible, but most of their buyers are normal people who either don't know what brands belong to them, or don't care enough to carefully investigate everything they buy. And those normal people are the ones the ads need to reach. If they leave twitter, what's the point of advertising there?
Yea, I think it makes sense for them to stop if they are getting a return on their investment.
Nestle has an extremely safe, risk-averse marketing strategy. In part due to their various scandals, they try really hard to be family friendly and boring.
That said, they are not worse than other food and beverage conglomerates.
1) child labor: mars & others were also implicated. These companies were most likely unaware of the child labor being used to harvest cocoa. The way it works is there are wholesalers in Africa who buy cocoa from processing facilities who buy fresh cocoa pods from local farms. These wholesalers advertised themselves as being child-labor-free. The farms they buy from were using child labor. This is a problem with capitalism exploiting people in the global south, causing perverse incentives, and with companies having limited insight into the full depth of their supply chains.
2) water is not a human right: The nestle water exec said the quiet part out loud. But, no beverage company believes water is a human right - they just aren't stupid enough to say that on camera. If they did think it was a human right, they'd be working to ensure universal access to clean water rather than bottling it and shipping it around the world while limiting water access at their extraction points and polluting the water near their factories. Look at what coca cola is doing in mexico - rampant water pollution such that in factory towns Coke is the only safe drink for folks because the water is contaminated. Nestle is bad, but no worse than coca cola.
3) infant formula scandal: this occurred in the 1970s and was obviously awful. Every major multinational food and beverage conglomerate has stories like this if you look hard enough - this just happens to be a fucked up series of events that got some major media play.
People online scapegoat Nestle, but continue to buy electronics and clothing made with child labor, tree nuts/soda/and other products known to be harmful to watersheds, and many other products from companies which harm people in the global south. This isn't meant to defend nestle, but to remind everyone that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Nestle is not anywhere close to an uniquely evil company. Not even in its own industry.
Thank you for putting it into perspective a little bit. I still won't buy Nestlé stuff but at least now I'll feel guilty buying anything else lol
Water *is* a human right. Quoth Article 11, (1) ICESCR:
"food" here can be safely assumed to include "water". "Everyone" means "also people who can't afford shoelaces". There's exactly one country in the world which didn't ratify the ICESCR and it's the US.
Regarding "uniquely evil": Yeah I'm definitely boycotting Chiquita (United Fruit) and Bacardi harder, both are still, effectively, whining about having their slave plantations expropriated. Both aren't exactly hard to do their bananas are more expensive than no-brand organic ones over here, and Bacardi, well there’s plenty of good rum, Bacardi ain't one of them. If you ever make a Cuba Libre with Bacardi I shall explode into tirades.
Oh of course I agree. That's just what the nestle asshole said.
That's good. Boycotts can be effective!
Can someone explain to me how you can sue over a business choosing to not spend their advertising dollars on a particular service? I mean Elon specifically told his customers to “fuck off” and now he’s suing them?!? I just don’t understand these petulant little man children being so litigious when they get their feefees hurt.
Easy, you pack courts with shills, you eliminate government oversight, and then you do whatever you want.
The actual "easy" part is that you can sue anyone for pretty much anything. Suing is entirely different from winning the case.
Why they think they have a chance of winning is the weirder question, especially when Musk publically told the advertisers to go fuck themselves.
Don't have to win, just drag the case out, causing both sides to spend fortunes on legal fees. Guess who has the most money.
X has an estimated market cap of $9.4 billion, whereas Nestlé has a market cap of $219 billion. That's a corporate superpower with no qualms about monopolizing freshwater or bait- & switching breast milk formula from babies. And it's just *one* of the companies they're taking on, with a shitty case to boot. So yeah... if I was Elon I would keep my head down.
Paying a couple of five or six figure sums to continue advertising on X, versus paying millions to fight a protracted legal battle - I know which option the shareholders of those companies will be pushing for.
I hate this timeline so much.
Maybe it'll turn around after the Bell protests
You mean the Bell Riots that started September 1, 2024? I'm not sure how to tell you this, but that didn't happen on schedule.
The object of the lawsuit is to get these deep pocketed corporations to settle for millions. If the companies aren’t able to get the suits dismissed, they will settle. They don’t want to get on the wrong side of the current administration and it’s less costly than a years long legal battle.
It's also a strong signal to future boycotters.
Sure thing! I found an article that explains it better than I could:
Oh man. I wish OP would have posted this first.
Here's the claim from the article:
You can sue for anything.
Instead of someone explaining, you could always read the article linked and see for yourself.
I did read the article.
For example how does this:
force someone or some company to spend their advertising dollars there. If a company spending ad money doesn’t like what the ad service represents, in this case Elon is a douchebag and we’ll just ignore the fact that he gave a Nazi salute at the inauguration, than they aren’t required to use them as a service, illegal boycott or not, which I don’t even believe is a thing.
Here’s a hyperbolic argument. Let’s just say for example we have two grocery stores. One promotes pedophilia and the other does not. The pedo grocery store has prices that are let’s say half of what the other grocery store is, because I don’t know fucking kids makes you feel generous. A bunch of people get together and decide they don’t wanna shop at NAMBLAmart. Is NAMBLAmart allow to sue me because I didn’t shop there?
Because unless I’m missing something, that’s pretty much the argument.
I think the attempted argument is anti-competitive collusion among all these companies. That GARM, fundamentally, is illegal as an anti-competitive initiative.
Thank you. This is exactly what kind of response I was looking for. I couldn’t find any logic in the argument at all. So essentially the organization is illegal. That at least makes some sense.
Edit: I mean I still think it’s bullshit but I can understand the argument now.
How long until Tesla sues me for buying a Toyota?
Currently scheduled for 18th of March.
Just in time for Toyotathon
Or is Toyotathon in time for this? The world may never know...
All the defense has to do is play the clip of him openly telling advertisers not to advertise and he'll get laughed out of court.
Most politicians are bought for less than a million. The guy has hundreds of billions. I imagine he can buy a few judges along the way.
Possibly, but none of those bought judges matter unless it ends up in their specific court. That's why they've been trying to install as many of their own as possible.
In an actual court? In Trumps america?
Unfortunately he sued in the North District of Texas, which is a maga kangaroo court
You know you've fucked up when even Nestlé doesn't want to work with you...
*Obligatory Fuck Nesté*
When people go *we may use child slaves in our supply chain, steal and ruin water supplies, and bribe medical professionals to get discourage breastfeeding, but you're too fucked up for us to work with* then you know you've fucked up.
To be clear, its not that twitter is too fucked up for nestle to work with, they absolutely would if they thought it would benefit them. Its that twitter has become so toxic that they see advertising there as a net negative.
To be able extra clear, fuck twitter, fuck nestle and fuuuuuuuck Musk.
The lesson here is to never start advertising on that platform. You’re less likely to be sued by Musk if you never start advertising in the first place. Advertising on his platform is an unnecessary risk for your business:
Preach. Never do business with a professional troll.
He must think it's like the old dealership laws. Once you enter into an agreement, you can't exit.
Advertise once, advertise forever!
In a sane world, this lawsuit would be laughed out of court.
It's harder to laugh it out of court when the plaintiff is in the government himself.
There's gotta be serious repercussions for this insane narcissist-autocratic behaviour. USA you're not just embarrassing, but a liability.
i don't understand how it's a boycott or how is illegal or unfair
It's not a boycott, neither is it illegal. He's literally just being a crybaby and believes that anybody not pandering to his business model should be forced by the courts to give him money regardless.
And he's now President of the US so he gets to make the laws.
And he bought the position fair and square.
Criminal contempt of business model
Nothing says you believe in free market competition more, than suing another private business, trying to force them to give you money
"Free market" was nothing but a propaganda term...
That has always been the essence of the "Free Market", for thee but not for me.
How dare your company not advertise on my company cause I’m a racist wanna be nazi twat.
Deleted by author
Wuaahh wuaahh wuaahh.
Musk will cry about this, about how he was so unfairly treated, from his cell in the insane asylum that I expect him to be in in about 10 years the way he has been getting worse for the past 10 years.
No better way to get people who used to voluntarily give you money to give you more money than threatening them.
wtf is musk even expecting to gain here
The legal system is essentially purchased at this point (remember everyone gloating about how the Onion bought InfoWars?)
There’s a chance he might find a toadie judge and get something out of this. Or at least be obnoxious enough that others might preemptively comply with something.
I mean he's being bukaked with publicity.... So if that's his thing?
What I'd like to know, assuming there is still logic and sanity in this world (please it's all I have don't argue) how would a company from this list have avoided this in the first place? Like once you start advertising with a partner like X then you may never stop? Seriously I'm not sure. So maybe just never risk doing business with anyone because you'll be sued into staying in business with them forever? I'm certain it's right in their contracts how and when they can leave, is that in dispute?
What does any screaming toddler in the toy aisle expect to gain?
Laws introduced to prevent people from boycotting israeli companies allow Musk to sueanyone who won't advertise on X for political reasons.
And no, the first amendment doesn't protect speech for private companies.
He'll win.
No he won't.
I give him about... 0% chance, with some pretty tight error bars.
The only way I see Musk eking out a win is if somehow those advertisers violated the contract terms by ending their business relationship, which would be incredibly surprising.
Oh yes Nestle, the infamously lefty liberals.
Can you please tag this elon, so that our spam filters work?
It's not practical to censor "x"
Yeah I know. It’s how I got (well forced) to see this story as well. I mean this douchebag is so rage inducing how could you NOT filter him.
What about censoring " x ". That might help filter more posts.
Yeah like x = y, not generic at all 😅Also it won't censor "bla bla x."
Yeah I had this thought as well. How I would love to be able to create filters based on RegExs.
Something like:
(? I think that might work.
This post would require "x " though.
Sounds like it’s time for people to learn regex.
Yup:
\<[xX]\>should do it, or whatever your regex engine's word break character is (sometimes\b).Deleted by author
Aye!
"^X .*$"
He's gone crazy from power. People like that are dangerous.
P.S. He acts like some Russian government official tied to organised crime, who now think he owns this country and can do anything in there.
All people are like that. Our brains aren’t built to handle that kind of obscene wealth and power. It would break anyone, just as overindulging in any unhealthy activity.
The fix is to not let anyone accumulate that level of wealth.
I'm kind of alright with them accumulating some level of wealth, if the result is that they get a little trophy, a little island, and all their money redistributed. Like, congrats you won, now fuck off and let someone else win too.
That's what we just tried (over the past century), when we gave an inch they took the whole god damn country. I don't think the compromise approach will ever work.
Like Tom from MySpace. Dude sold it off and now lives a carefree life pursuing photography
Money are just an instrument for power. These are narcissists/psychopaths/power abusers/sociopaths/gangsters/criminals
K. Power still corrupts. Always has.
Throwing a temper tantrum because no-one wants to play with you. What a child!
Are boycotts illegal? In this case I doubt there was an organized attempt, just some companies making individual business decisions. But even if Twitter can prove there was a boycott, is there a law against that?
Boycotts are absolutely legal, you are completely entitled to decide who you don't want to do business with. However, illegality is no longer required for the justice system to be weaponized against you, and President Musk just wants to make an example to others who might not want to do business with an actual Nazi.
Surely it's up to the advertisers to choose where who they pay money to use?
The law doesn't matter. With Musk's position in the government this will basically end up as extortion: Settle or I'll make things difficult for you.
a certain amount of business collusion can be considered a cartel (other kind) and essentially monopolistic… but that’s usually price fixing… i don’t see how they could be compelled to advertise on a nazi platform.
also, i respect these companies much more than any company that would, and consider this lawsuit great advertising
but then again, the right trump appointed federal judge makes meaning pointless in law…
It depends on the boycott.
Last year he told everybody to go fuck themselves. Now he's crying. If there is somebody who needs to be deported, is it his narcistic, selfish, apartheid's ass.
Yea, in a sane justice system, that one tweet would rpget this case thrown out on day 1. In the world we now live in, I'm not so sure.
This donkey about to get taught a lesson by nestle. He probably thinks he's hot shit now but he poked the devil.
I'm surprised they haven't killed his children already.
They needn't to do so. His children are dead to him.
It's worse for him if they are kept alive because it's a public reminder how much they hate him. Nestle starting shipping his kids the good food reserved for the lizard people only
He would wish that he did. He hates his kids
He built a compound for all his kids and baby mommas to live at. I'm sure he excluded his trans kid from that though.
Yes, sue literally every company in America, nothing could possibly go wrong.
Lego is based in Denmark and nestle is in Switzerland.
Wait those cunts are Swiss?
I suddenly like the Swiss a tiny bit less.
They're only neutral in world wars
they just be war criming out here with no war. the devil doesn't need to partake in human wars
I didn't know Citizens United gave companies *forced* speech.
The speech is free. Xitter could advertise for these companies for free. It's the money that's being forced...
Oh wait I forgot money is speech. It's so hard to keep up with the state's counter-reality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_religion
tHe mArKeT WiLl ReGuLaTe ItSeLf!
Suing companies for not advertising on a platform For Nazis, By Nazis™. 🤡
Nazi vs Nestle. Always win for us.
let them fight.jpg
Life goals, don't fuck up so bad that even Nestle wont work with you!
If suing companies for not advertising on your platform made any sense, porn sites could sue almost the whole economy.
How is this even a thing? Is a bank run considered collusion? If the platform no longer offers the audience I want to reach then I should be able to stop advertising on it. It just happens that the audience of may companies at once left the company. Who is even entertaining this lawsuit?
"I ruined my business by supporting Nazis and it's all your fault!"
"I'm in a government that condones - if not encourages - businesses from rejecting customers based on their own ideology, but don't do it to me!"
Musk is not just supporting Nazis, he is a flaming Nazi himself.
Yes but this all happened before he even went full mask off.
Yes it absolutely did, but the platform was not run responsibly, and contained hate speech. Musk even claimed the Nazi content besides adverts was a rare fluke.
Which is obvious today is not true. What Musk may really want, is to normalize Nazi content.
i wounder if he will actually get a court to order that every person in the world owes him money.
cause that seems to be what he is working towards.
No, the case is that advertisers used an Ad Advisory Group called GARM, that monitored advertising platforms on their quality, like being family friendly and keeping things within the law. When they advised their customers that they could no longer vouch for X, many advertisers followed their guidance.
Obviously they are in their right to do so, and there was absolutely nothing wrong with the procedures that were followed, like it was NOT cartel or any other kind of shenanigans by the users of that service.
https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/ad-advisory-group-suspends-activity-following-legal-action-from-x/723785/
But Musk being a paranoid malignant narcissistic crybaby, saw it as a conspiracy directed against him personally. And the guy has more money than sense, so he is making a huge issue out of it.
Luckily USA is a nation of law, so he won't get anywhere with that, just like he wouldn't get away with calling people pedophiles for no other reason than to offend them. Thank god USA isn't corrupt as hell, so we can trust the courts to do the right thing. /s
On the other hand we also have EU warning against advertising on X:
https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/11/17/eu-commission-advises-services-to-stop-advertising-on-elon-musks-x
The eu commission warning was officially only aimed at their internal services, it wasn't a mandate that all organisations within the eu should stop advertising on x. Though it wouldn't surprise me if it comes to a total ban in the eu, X is already under investigation for disinformation.
Yes it was "just" a warning for EU offices, But that's still pretty remarkable, and this warning is widely publicly known, and I bet companies take notice.
But the point was also, that it's not just GARM that had problems with how things are at Xitter, it's official from EU that it's not desirable to use Xitter anymore, based on much the same reasons GARM stated. For their
recommendationwarning to avoid advertising on Xitter.So it's evidence that GARM didn't just make it up to harm Xitter. The same conclusions were reached elsewhere.
We should absolutely do that, and introduce a special Tesla Tariff of 200%, due to unfair competition because the Tesla CEO is part of the government, and it is a blatantly conflict of interest for Musk to be there and be CEO of several companies at the same time.
Jimmy Carter sold his beloved Peanut Farm exactly to avoid a conflict of interest, but the American politicians, the public and the media today don't give a shit about corruption. But it's still illegal in EU.
… and Musk supporting anti-EU parties.
Let me ask you this: how many ads have *you* run on Twitter? Does that strike you as fair?
If he does, they will lose ALL advertising
YouTube 10 years ago: we’re becoming as straight-edged as possible to keep advertisers around
Twitter now: Fuck you (wait we needed you)
Link without the trackers attached to it: https://techcrunch.com/2025/02/01/x-expands-lawsuit-over-advertiser-boycott-to-include-lego-nestle-pinterest-and-others/
Nobody wants either side to actually win, we'll root for whoever is currently more messed up hoping they'll make a comeback and prolong the fight.
Hey Elmo, you told the advertisers to “go fuck yourself” in no uncertain terms, even repeating yourself for dramatic effect.
Hey I’ve got an idea Elmo. Go fuck yourself.
so a south African is suing a swiss company in American court? why just why is this theatrical bullshit allowed to go on so sick of this already times be changing too slowly we need the next phase already
Deleted by author
Its an american company suing an american subsidiary of a swiss company. It makes sense. You dont have to try very hard to find the ridiculousness in these people but this isnt it.
"The lawsuit isn’t the only place where executives have offered a pessimistic assessment of X’s business. The company’s owner Elon Musk reportedly told employees in January that “user growth is stagnant, revenue is unimpressive, and we’re barely breaking even.”"
Just fire some people, that’ll drive profits up.
"We're barely breaking even" mate, you're supposedly in the business of online services since the late 90s, you should know that they're generally "barely breaking even"
I wasn't aware Twitter was even breaking even in thd first place
What about capital markets and the freedom to choose where to spend your money? Elmo can go get pegged by Trump.
They can peg eachother. "Ass to ass!"
))<>((
forever
And no lube.
I'm torn about disliking this douchebag and liking that Nestlé is getting sued...
On the scale of who is fucking up the world more, I’d have to award the trophy to Leon. Certainly fuck Nestle, but won’t someone please rid us of this meddlesome billionaire?
Elon is a twat and a menace for sure, but Nestlé have employed business strategies that literally killed infants and caused malnourishment...they are a completely different league of evil, far far worse than what Elon has done so far.
Key part of that sentence is "so far"
Yeah, I tend to believe it would be better to stop the entity that has currently done the most harm, with no intent to stop, first...I'm weird like that.
Maybe both at the same time. It's possible to do two things.
Musk knows no bottom, cause he is the bottom.
Tbf every body needs an asshole. Except the us, which seems to have two.
I suppose after he gets done there he will come after people like me who have blocked every musk related business from my network.
Can Elon and Yaccarino just die already
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2069436850145993
50 States, 50 Protests, 1day
Feb 5 @ your downtown.
The irony of using one fascist billionaires platform to organize against another fascist billionaire and his platform, but also the government.
Can you screenshot that or something. I can't see it without the Facebook account I refuse to have.
I can't see it either. I'm not on Facebook. Someone found more details by googling it.
Organizing on Facebook? Wtaf.
That's a no from me dawg.
He’s levying tithes.
It's a Good Thing Elon doesn't Own the DOJ!
Ah, evil vs evil *eats popcorn*
Deleted by author
Plenty actually, like former slaves from plantations which sold products to Nestle.
...it's part of the reason why Nestle is currently lobbying the EU to *not* dilute the supply chain act, those kinds of cases are a PITA for them, and the documentation they need to do for the supply chain act is exactly what they need to nib cases in the bud, "Here's the inspections we did, here are transcripts of anonymous interviews with random workers at the plantation", "If something slipped between the cracks we deeply regret that but we did do our due diligence, plaintiff's beef is with their ex boss, not with us".
It is absolutely more expensive to pay an army of lawyers to defend yourself than it is to pay workers proper local wages and document that. Not to mention that people who run slave plantations don't share their extra profit with Nestle.
The other reason is that they don't want smaller companies to have a competitive advantage: Smaller companies are not subject to those kinds of lawsuits, and also the ones complaining about the supply chain act. Nestle is also not at all keen on a consumer boycott from Africa.
He should sue everyone that left X!!
What an ugly fuck Elon is. Ewwww
Anyone getting sued by him should just demand a jury trial. No way you'll get enough Americans to side with musk on anything.
I love this song