Elon Musk’s X enters legal battle over Alex Jones’ Infowars. Experts say it is unprecedented

New York
CNN
—

Elon Musk’s X is intervening in the bankruptcy sale of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ Infowars, in what is believed to be the first time a social media platform has entered into a legal dispute over account ownership.

Jones’ Free Speech Systems, the parent company of Infowars, was recently auctioned off to help pay some of the nearly $1.5 billion Jones owes the families of the Sandy Hook massacre victims after he was found guilty of defamation. The satirical news site The Onion was declared the winner of the auction, with support from some of the families, in a seven-figure bid that Jones and his allies are challenging in court.

The sale includes Infowars’ website, study equipment, online supplement store and social media accounts followed by millions of users.

In past legal disputes over account ownership, social media companies have left it up to the courts and the parties involved to figure it out. But in this case, X steps in and objects to Jones and Infowars’ X accounts being part of the sale.

“Elon Musk, without a doubt, is a hero,” Jones said on a recent episode of his Infowars show, where he praised the billionaire X owner for intervening in his case.

That stands out to experts in social media law.

“This is the first time I’ve seen a social media platform argue in court that nobody can transfer ownership during a dispute over who owns an account because they just want to turn it off,” said Toby Butterfield, who teaches in the Social Media Act. at Columbia University’s Law School.

In a filing this week in Texas bankruptcy court, lawyers for X said the company does not object to the overall sale of Infowars’ parent company, but “objects to any proposed sale or other purported transfer of any account used by Jones or FSS, maintained on the X Platform (“X”).

That’s because X says its terms of service make it clear that accounts cannot be sold and are ultimately owned by X. While not unusual for a social media platform’s terms of service, tech companies usually quietly enforce these terms and don’t advocate for that public court battles, said Eric Goldman, an associate dean and professor of technology law at Santa Clara University School of Law.

“Social media services approach this topic cautiously because they want to encourage their users to invest heavily in their accounts,” Goldman said. “If users fear that the services can recoup those investments by taking back or exerting control over the lever, superusers will be reluctant to make the desired investments.”

Two things can be true at once, both experts said: Musk may be getting involved because of his political leanings and to set a legal precedent in a high-profile case involving well-known X accounts.

“It’s not like the law has changed here. It’s that Elon Musk as the owner and the people running the X are flexing their muscles in a very new and different way,” Butterfield said.

By intervening in the matter, X further shows how the platform is ultimately Musk’s domain, where he can do as he pleases. Musk has previously shown a willingness to take over accounts, threatening NPR after the public broadcaster stopped posting his account and seizing the @America handle of his political action committee that supported President-elect Donald Trump during the campaign.

“What conceivable motivation does a company have to destroy the value in their users’ accounts and implicitly threaten all other users?” Butterfield said. “It becomes an individual person’s playground rather than a functioning marketplace of ideas.”