The technology that could decide Twitter’s Musk lawsuit – AFR

If Twitter’s lawsuit over Elon Musk’s $44 billion takeover bid ever goes to trial, the case will likely center on a ubiquitous and often unloved technology: bots.

The information Twitter has or hasn’t provided about its list of fake or spam accounts is Musk’s stated reason for pulling out of the deal — a move that prompted the firm to sue him this week.

Here’s a closer look at the complications surrounding bot accounts and how they would be key in deciding the case.

Basically, “bots” are software programs that perform automated tasks online, often with the goal of mimicking human behavior.

Twitter tolerates some automated uses, like an account that tweets each time the Hubble Space Telescope crosses the sky over a specific city.

But Twitter has rules for automated account actions, including banning software from posting about hot topics, firing spam, trying to influence online conversations, and working across multiple accounts.

The company says it runs a daily campaign against spam or fake accounts, keeping the numbers below five percent of users.

When Musk’s attorneys tweeted on July 8 that he was “terminating” the agreement to purchase the company, the attorneys claimed the platform had made “false and misleading representations” about bots and failed to provide details he needed to verify their allegations needed.

Determining the number of bots on the site is a bit of an art, as the count is determined in part by Twitter’s internal definitions and the workers who apply the rules.

While some cases are clear violations, others may require the judgment of individuals weighing various facts.

“People can disagree on what should be considered a bot or a spam account,” said Edwin Chen, a former Twitter contributor who is now CEO of content moderation company Surge AI.

The number would also be difficult for an outsider like Musk to confirm, as the bot cleaning process may involve verifying IP or email addresses or other sensitive user data.

“I think a lot of people, not even my former colleagues, but people in the tech industry in general, know that this is a thorny, thorny question,” Chen added.

Twitter’s lawsuit, which is asking a court to force Musk to honor its takeover bid, could lead to a court hearing or settlement talks that would need to delve into the intricacies of things like the company’s bot definitions and policies.

Musk’s attorneys said he had previously requested, but not received, “Twitter’s methodology and performance data” for detecting and blocking spam and fake accounts.

“In short, Twitter has not provided any information requested by Mr. Musk for nearly two months,” the attorneys wrote when making the case for the goal of abandoning the deal.

Speculation has mounted that the bot issue — with its tricky, detailed, and case-by-case aspects — is just a convenient way for Musk to abandon or renegotiate his proposal.

However, bots are a problem online.

“Malicious actors have almost unlimited resources and incentives to use bots for nefarious purposes,” said Tamer Hassan, co-founder and chief of cybersecurity firm HUMAN.

Bots are used in more than three quarters of internet security and fraud incidents, from spreading socially divisive posts to snagging hot concert tickets to hacking, Hassan told AFP.

Also, Twitter makes its money from ads, and marketers pay to reach people, not software.

Therefore, “bot ads aren’t going to have a good closing rate because bots aren’t buying products,” analyst Rob Enderle previously told AFP.

When advertisers pay Twitter fees based on how many people see ads, and those numbers are inflated because of bots in online audiences, they get overwhelmed, Enderle added.

If Twitter has a lot more bots than it admits, its earnings could fall if those accounts are exposed and shut down.

Or, as Musk’s attorneys put it, Twitter’s true everyday users who can be shown ads are “a key component of the company’s business, as approximately 90 percent of its revenue comes from advertising.”