Twitter reportedly said this week that Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s own data scientists do not believe that the number of fake accounts on the Twitter platform is “much higher” than the company’s estimates, as Musk said. The two sides are currently preparing for an upcoming lawsuit trial in October.
Musk is trying to back out of a deal to buy Twitter for $44 billion. Musk previously said this was because the real number of fake and spam accounts on the Twitter platform was far greater than the 5 percent the company has said for years, thus misleading regulators and investors.
At a three-hour Delaware court hearing on Tuesday local time, Twitter’s lawyers said documents they received during the evidence-gathering process showed that Cyabra and CounterAction, two consultants hired by Musk, estimated the number of spam accounts on the Twitter platform at 11 percent and 5 percent, respectively, which is consistent with Twitter’s publicly available estimates The data is largely consistent with Twitter’s publicly available estimates.
Twitter’s lawyers said the reports were filed the day before Musk announced his plans to end the merger. In addition, Twitter criticized the methodology of the two data sets, despite the conclusions reached in its favor.
Twitter urged the court to compel Musk to share more information about the research his own data science consultants conducted on the Twitter platform’s fake accounts, and Twitter’s lawyers said that while Musk shared some details of the consultants’ research, he has been “dilatory and obstructive for the past two months. The lawyer for Twitter said that although Musk had shared some details of the consultant’s research, he had taken a “delaying and obstructive attitude” over the past two months. Musk’s lawyers have denied the allegations in this regard.
In addition, Twitter accused Musk’s team of failing to submit relevant chats via the encrypted communications app Signal, as well as denying that Musk had used the chat app. The messages were automatically deleted after a period of time.
Andreessen emailed screenshots of the chat to others, and the conversation then became known to the public.
Twitter also said that Musk’s team failed to submit text messages between Musk and Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman and Oracle founder Larry Ellison before the trial.
Musk’s lawyers denied intentionally concealing the content of the communications, saying it was “a minor error that would occur in an expedited litigation process.
Twitter has asked the court to impose sanctions on Musk for misconduct in the release of information. This also includes a so-called “adverse inference” that the court could assume that Musk withheld factual details against him.
Delaware Court of Chancery Judge Kathaleen McCormick did not make an immediate ruling, saying she would consider it further after consulting with counsel. The five-day trial is set to begin Oct. 17.
Musk’s deposition in the Twitter acquisition case was rescheduled for Oct. 6-7
Tesla CEO Elon Musk was reportedly scheduled to return to court on Sept. 26 and 27 local time for questions from Twitter’s lawyers, where the two sides will discuss his efforts to back out of the acquisition deal. The deal comes after Musk reached an agreement with Twitter to buy the social media giant for $44 billion, but then Musk wanted to abandon the deal.
On Monday, a court filing showed that the date of the deposition has been changed and the world’s richest man will now be questioned at the law firm of Potter Anderson & Corroon in Wilmington, Delaware, starting at 9:30 a.m. local time on Oct. 6 and 7.
The deposition will be conducted by a notary public, court reporter or other authorized person qualified to administer oaths, and will be recorded by stenographic, audio and visual means,” the document states. The deposition will last two days before it is completed. All attorneys of record are invited to attend and participate.”
In addition to Musk, Twitter Inc. chief executive Parag Agrawal was scheduled to be questioned on Monday. However, his deposition was also rescheduled to a later date, a source familiar with the matter told the media.
Others scheduled to be questioned in the case include Musk’s lawyer Alex Spiro, Twitter board chairman Brett Taylor, Silver Lake Partners CEO Egon Durban and Twitter chief privacy officer Damien Kieran.)
Representatives for Musk did not immediately return a request for comment, and a Twitter spokesman declined to comment.
Twitter, which wants Musk to implement the original terms of the deal, has filed a lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court in July alleging that Musk refused to fulfill his obligations under the agreement because “the deal he signed was no longer in his personal interest. The company accepted Musk’s offer of $54.20 per share in April.
Musk has also filed a countersuit against Twitter, alleging that Twitter violated its obligations under the agreement by misrepresenting the total number of spam and fake accounts on its platform, which Twitter maintains represents less than 5 percent of its total users.
In addition, Musk’s countersuit includes allegations from former Twitter security chief-turned-whistleblower Peiter “Mudge” Zatko that the company had “extreme and egregious deficiencies” in its cybersecurity.
In addition to Twitter’s security flaws, Zatko claims that the company’s executives were “not encouraged to accurately detect or report the full range of spam-bot accounts on the platform. Instead, they were allegedly incentivized to increase the company’s profitable daily active users (mDAUs), which could amount to more than $10 million in bonuses. He also claimed that Twitter did not have enough resources to fully understand the true number of bots on the platform.
Twitter said Zatko’s allegations about its privacy and data security practices are “misrepresentations, riddled with inconsistencies and inaccuracies, and lacking in an important context.
