When you can 'tweet' but can't 'twitter'

Last year I was made aware of a startup called Operation Bluebird, which is focused on attempting to free the Twitter brand from X.com. They claim X has abandoned the trademark of Twitter (plus the terms “tweet” and “retweet”) and so it’s fair game for them trade on Twitter’s name recognition with a new service. This has spun out into a legal dispute, which continues to this day.

Over the last few weeks two things happened in quick succession.

First, Operation Bluebird launched Twitter.now. As stated previously, the legal dispute continues. It’s a standard micro-blogging affair, but with the Twitter branding + a $20 “founders” fee.

Eight days later there was a quick rebrand from Twitter.now to tweet.app, as a judge ruled that they couldn’t use the name “Twitter”. But they could use “Tweet” and the “Bird” logo.

I think there are a few interesting bits here. First is that Operation Bluebird still exists. With Threads, Bluesky, X, and Mastodon all vying for relevancy, there being another micro-blogging service whose USP is brand recognition doesn’t seem like a solid bet. Name recognition certainly can get you far, but not that far. Micro-blogging is crowded, and after 3+ years of X.com, it seems like a very tenuous business proposition.

Second is, again, how stupid it was for Musk to rebrand Twitter. The fact that thousands still search for Twitter, news outlets still write “X (formerly Twitter)”, and anecdotally I still see many websites with the blue Twitter logo shows what a colossal screw-up the rebrand was. I expect it’s now being taught in Business & Product Management courses as a cautionary tale across the world.

In the end, I don’t think it really matters if Operation Bluebird succeeds or fails. I don’t think the micro-blogging space can handle another service, nor do I think the “Twitter” brand is strong enough alone to pull punters away from their favourite haunts.