Twitter lawyers say Elon Musk wanted out of the deal because of ‘World War III’, not because of bots

A whistleblower complaint from Twitter’s former chief of security is already complicating the company’s legal battle with Elon Musk. Lawyers representing Musk and Twitter met in court Tuesday for a hearing that will determine whether the allegations made by Peter “Mudge” Zatko add to Elon Musk’s legal case for giving up his $44 billion commitment to buy Twitter.

Notably, the hearing was one of the first times that any representative on Twitter addressed Zatko’s complaint publicly. In the two weeks since Zatko was announced to the public, Twitter has become pretty much On the core of the claims.

During the hearing, Twitter lawyers portrayed Zatko as a disgruntled employee, saying he had a “big ax to grind” with the company and that he was “not responsible for Twitter spam.” They accused him of “organizing his whistleblower complaint, to link it to the merger agreement”. (Zatko’s lawyers previously said he did not come out to the public for “Musk’s statement.”) It should be noted that Twitter’s attorneys did not address allegations that the company’s lax security practices may have hurt Or that CEO Parag Agrawal asked Zatko to lie to the company’s board of directors.

Twitter’s lawyers noted that Musk was looking for reasons to cancel the deal before Zatko’s complaint was public. At one point, a Twitter lawyer quoted a text message Musk sent on May 3 to his Morgan Stanley bankers:

Twitter’s lawyer read aloud, quoting Musk: “Let’s just slow down for a few days… It wouldn’t make sense to buy Twitter if we were headed into World War III.” That’s why Mr. Musk didn’t want to buy Twitter, this stuff about bots, mDAU [monetizable daily active users] Zatko is all an excuse.”

See also  The Chinese technology giant announced an increase in its revenues

On the other hand, Musk’s lawyers described Zatko’s credentials as a “honored” executive who had previously been offered the position of a US government official. They said that Musk had “nothing to do” with the whistleblower Zatko’s complaint and that Twitter intentionally concealed harmful information. However, it is not clear whether it will be enough to influence the judge in the case. In one exchange, the judge made explicit reference to Musk’s decision to waive due diligence before approving the takeover.

Why didn’t we find this out seriously,” Musk’s lawyer said, referring to the whistleblower Zatko’s complaint. “They hid it, and that’s why.” The judge replied, “We’ll never know, will we.” “Because ijtihad did not happen.”

Musk’s lawyers, who are pressing for a delay in the October trial, closed the more than three-hour hearing by saying, “It’s not us who caused this chaos or this delay.”

He said, in a clear – and unconvincing – reference to From musk directed to Agrawal. “The reason they are having practical Twitter meetings today is because one of the senior executives appointed said the company was committing fraud. Is this our fault? This is our mess? This is their mess.”

All products recommended by Engadget are handpicked by our editorial team, independently of the parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. All prices are correct at the time of publication.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *