Twitter board agrees to $44 billion sale to billionaire Tesla founder Elon Musk

[Ralin]

Doesn't Wechat have the major advantage of the Chinese government not allowing anyone to compete with it ?

Eh. Kinda, maybe? It's complicated at least. They do have local competitors even if they are the top dog. Alipay isn't small. And every social media or payment platform in China is subject to government regulation. I don't know how much the government put their thumb on the scale vs taking advantage afterwards but the important thing is that however exactly it happened they were the ones that hit the critical mass to do the thing Musk wants to do.

[Crazedwraith]

Even if you have an account you can only see so many posts now.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-66077195

Twitter temporarily restricts tweets users can see, Elon Musk announces

Twitter has applied a temporary limit to the number of tweets users can read in a day, owner Elon Musk has said.

In a tweet of his own, Mr Musk said unverified accounts are now limited to reading 600 posts a day.

For new unverified accounts, the number is 300. Meanwhile, accounts with "verified" status are currently limited to 6,000 posts a day.

Mr Musk said the temporary limits were to address "extreme levels of data scraping and system manipulation".

He did not explain what was meant by system manipulation in this context. Data scraping refers to a process that sees information pulled out of a website and imported into another programme.

"We were getting data pillaged so much that it was degrading service for normal users," Mr Musk explained on Friday, after users were presented with screens asking them to log in to view Twitter content.

The move was described as a "temporary emergency measure".

It is not totally clear what Mr Musk is referring to by data scraping, but it appears he means the scraping of large amounts of data used by artificial intelligence (AI) companies to train large language models, which power chatbots such as Open AI's ChatGPT and Google's Bard.

In simple terms, data scraping is the pulling of information from the internet. Large language models need to learn from masses of real human conversations. But the quality is vital to the success of a chatbot. Reddit and Twitter's huge trove of billions of posts are thought to be hugely important training data - and used by AI companies.

But platforms like Twitter and Reddit want to be paid for this data.

In April, Reddit's chief executive Steve Huffman told the New York Times that he was unhappy with what AI companies were doing.

"The Reddit corpus of data is really valuable," he said. "But we don't need to give all of that value to some of the largest companies in the world for free."

Twitter has already started charging users to access its application programming interface (API), which is often used by third party apps and researchers - which can include AI companies.

There are other potential reasons for the move too.

Mr Musk has been pushing people towards Twitter Blue, its paid subscription service. It's possible he is looking at a model where users will have to pay to get a full Twitter service - and access to unlimited posts.

Signalled by a blue tick, "verified" status was given for free by Twitter to high-profile accounts before Mr Musk took over as its boss. Now, most users have to pay a subscription fee from $8 (£6.30) per month to be verified, and can gain the status regardless of their profile.

According to the website Downdetector - which tracks online outages - a peak of 5,126 people reported problems accessing the platform in the UK at 16:12 BST on Saturday.

In the US, roughly 7,461 people reported glitches around the same time.

After announcing the initial reading limits on Saturday, Mr Musk added that the reading limits would "soon" rise to 800 tweets per day for unverified accounts, 400 for new unverified accounts and 8,000 for verified accounts.

In another update Mr Musk said "several hundred organisations (maybe more) were scraping Twitter data extremely aggressively".

He later indicated there had been a burden on his website, saying it was "rather galling to have to bring large numbers of servers online on an emergency basis".

A server is a powerful computer that manages and stores files, providing services such as web pages for users.

Mr Musk bought the company last year for $44bn (£35bn) after much back and forth. He was critical of Twitter's previous management and said he did not want the platform to become an echo chamber.

Soon after taking over, he cut the workforce from just under 8,000 staff to about 1,500.

In an interview with the BBC, he said that cutting the workforce had not been easy.

Engineers were included in the layoffs and their exit raised concerns about the platform's stability.

But while Mr Musk acknowledged some glitches, he told the BBC in April that outages had not lasted very long and the site was working fine.

So clearly everything's fine.

[bilateralrope]

Yaccarino makes an announcement about how Twitter is going to try and make advertising on Twitter more appealing to advertisers. Then Musk announces that they are limiting the number of tweets people can view each day. Which will limit how many ads people see and show make advertisers worried about their capability to serve video ads.

[Lost Soal]

Yaccarino makes an announcement about how Twitter is going to try and make advertising on Twitter more appealing to advertisers. Then Musk announces that they are limiting the number of tweets people can view each day. Which will limit how many ads people see and show make advertisers worried about their capability to serve video ads.

Its even better. If your not signed in, you see none. Will that make you sign up or say "Fuck this shit"?

[Zaune]

Not directly Twitter-related, but a shining example of the level on which Dilbert Stark is operating... https://www.arenaev.com/tesla_thinks_a_ ... s-2042.php

In what is most likely the latest example of Elon Musk's very special sense of humor, Tesla is apparently offering UK customers buying a Model S or Model X some consolation for the fact that the vehicles they're getting have left-hand drive.

That consolation 'prize' is a bonus grabbing stick, which Tesla has branded The Reacher. What is this good for? Well, supposedly, you can use it to grab things from the right side - like parking receipts, and even drive-thru items if you happen to frequent such establishments.

So is this useful, then? Well, arguably, yes, but it's only useful to circumvent a problem Tesla itself has created by deciding to stop making right-hand drive Model X and Model S vehicles.

So... yeah. That's a thing.

[Broomstick]

I saw those reacher-grabbers on sale at Harbor Freight for $2.99 each, which is a really cheapskate way to deal with this issue for UK drivers. What a piece of shit Musk is.

[bilateralrope]

My question is, why would someone want to buy a car that has the steering wheel on the wrong side for your country ?

Another example of Musk's thinking is that he apparently has agreed to a cage match against Mark Zuckerberg. When Zuckerberg is over a decade younger, has MMA training and has won jiu-jitsu tournaments.

Maybe Musk backs out of it. Maybe he loses in a very public fight. Either way it's going to be entertaining for us.

[Ralin]

My question is, why would someone want to buy a car that has the steering wheel on the wrong side for your country ?

I'm a little surprised that it's legal to drive one. Though I guess I shouldn't be since cars and trucks go across the border between Hong Kong and mainland China.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

My question is, why would someone want to buy a car that has the steering wheel on the wrong side for your country ?

I'm a little surprised that it's legal to drive one. Though I guess I shouldn't be since cars and trucks go across the border between Hong Kong and mainland China.

Yes, you can legally drive a left-hand-drive car in the UK. Left-hand-drive vehicles have usually been imported into the UK. And because the rest of Europe is LHD those who cross the channel have to make the mental shift. This map offers a handy illustration:



If you had more money than sense and it was a special car like a Bugatti Veyron/Chiron that only exists in LHD configuration there's a case for it. But a company that has been making RHD just fine no longer making them? That's a dealbreaker right there and I imagine a LOT of cancelled orders since the waiting list for a tesla is measured in years.

Another example of Musk's thinking is that he apparently has agreed to a cage match against Mark Zuckerberg. When Zuckerberg is over a decade younger, has MMA training and has won jiu-jitsu tournaments.

Maybe Musk backs out of it. Maybe he loses in a very public fight. Either way it's going to be entertaining for us.

It doesn't help Musk that he looks like he's aged ten years in the ten months he's owned Twitter

[Crazedwraith]

I'm assuming the cage match thing is a dumb joke and a ploy to get people talking about that and him being a cool eccentric billionaire and not... all the other shit we're talking about here.

[Broomstick]

My question is, why would someone want to buy a car that has the steering wheel on the wrong side for your country ?

In some cases it might be a status thing.

In other cases a person (collector?) might want a very particular car.

I'll just point out that US mail delivery vehicles have right-hand drive, contrary to the norm. It's so the driver can put mail in mailboxes alongside the road without having to get out or leave their seat.

It's entirely legal to drive either sort in the US so long as you can keep it properly between the lines, on the correct side of the road, etc.

[bobalot]

Google decimates Twitter search results after Elon Musk imposes limits on reading tweets

Google has reportedly removed much of Twitter's links from its search results after the social network's owner Elon Musk announced reading tweets would be limited.

Search Engine Roundtable found that Google had removed 52% of Twitter links since the crackdown began last week. Twitter now blocks users who are not logged in and sets limits on reading tweets.

According to Barry Schwartz, Google reported 471 million Twitter URLs as of Friday. But by Monday morning, that number had plummeted to 227 million.

"For normal indexing of these Twitter URLs, it seems like these tweets are dropping out of the sky," Schwartz wrote.

Platformer reported last month that Twitter refused to pay its bill for Google Cloud services.

"Prior to Musk buying Twitter last year, the company signed a multi-year contract with Google to host services related to fighting spam, removing child sexual abuse material, and protecting accounts, among other things," according to Platformer.

Source

I don't think the story is quite right. I suspect the crawler can no longer access the tweets, so it simply does not index them.

Regardless, another self-own by Elon "Space Jesus" Musk.

[LadyTevar]

Source

I don't think the story is quite right. I suspect the crawler can no longer access the tweets, so it simply does not index them.

Regardless, another self-own by Elon "Space Jesus" Musk.

I think you're right. This isn't malice, this is simple "Can't Index what you can't See".

[bilateralrope]

Regardless, another self-own by Elon "Space Jesus" Musk.

Speaking of self-owns:

Twitter users claim Elon Musk’s recent changes may be “self-DDoSing” the platform

Carver Fisher
❘ Published: Jul 02, 2023, 09:09
❘ Updated: Jul 02, 2023, 09:09

Though Elon Musk has explained that rate limits for Twitter are likely the reason behind some users being unable to access the platform, others have speculated that recent changes to how Tweets can be viewed have resulted in Twitter “self-DDoSing” by overloading its server with requests.

Ever since Elon Musk bought out Twitter, his changes to the platform have been controversial. Between Twitter Blue eradicating legacy verified badges and various changes that incentivize people to pay for Twitter, not everyone has been happy with his leadership.

And, despite him having officially given over the CEO title to Linda Yaccarino, Elon Musk still has a massive presence on the platform and announces many of the biggest changes to the way users interact with Twitter.

Though recent troubles with the platform being accessed have been explained as a temporarily enforced limit on Twitter traffic on a per-user basis, tech-savvy users on the platform think there may be something else afoot here.

Twitter users claim the platform may be overloading itself

While the change to restrict how many Tweets users can view per day is surely a contributor to recent issues with the platform, there’s also another fairly recent change that some users weren’t particularly happy with.

Recently, Twitter was changed to only be accessible to logged-in users. Before, users that browsed while not logged in would eventually be prompted to create an account or sign in. Now people can’t even access the site unless they have an account currently logged in.

This has resulted in Twitter requesting data that never comes, creating what’s essentially a feedback loop that could be overloading their servers.

For those unaware, a DDoS attack (aka distributed denial of service) is often carried out by overloading a server with so many requests that it shuts down.

If you’ve ever tried to access a popular online game on launch day and been unable to access servers, it’s likely because the servers are overloaded with people trying to get in and play. A DDoS attack is functionally the same thing except those requests are manufactured.

However, in the case of recent changes to Twitter, some users have claimed that the amount of requests sent to Twitter as a result of the site being blocked across so many platforms has created a scenario where the servers cannibalize themselves, sending out a massive number of requests for data that have no hope of being fulfilled. Thus a “self-DDoS”.

It remains to be seen whether or not this is one of the reasons behind Twitter’s recent problems, but users are convinced that some of the recent changes have led to some unintended consequences.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Someone had to do it:
Facebook owner Meta launches new social media app 'Threads' to rival Twitter

Facebook owner Meta is launching a new app called Threads, which appears to be a direct rival to Twitter.

Threads, which will be linked to Instagram, is already available for pre-order in the Apple App Store and will go live for users on Thursday.

It is described as a “text-based conversation app… where communities come together”.

The new app is the latest chapter in the rivalry between Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, who bought Twitter in October - bringing in changes that have barely left the headlines since.

How will Thread work?

The new app appears to be free, and features a similar interface to Twitter.

A 'thread,' on social media, describes a series of inter-connected posts.

The terminology is particularly strongly associated with Twitter, where users will tend to pen a string of posts on a point in reply to their original tweet.

Meta has barely released any details about its upcoming product.

But a preview of the app has already appeared in iPhones app stores, as 'Threads, an Instagram app,' available for pre-download before its launch on Thursday, July 6.

A series of promotional images suggest it uses an aesthetic similar to Instagram's template for Twitter-style posts.

The promotional material says Instagram users will be able to keep the same username for their Threads app, and will be prompted to request to follow the same accounts they follow on Instagram.

Threads encourages people to 'connect over conversation,' and 'share your point of view' in text-based short posts.

Similarly to Twitter, Threads appears to have sharing options that appear to include a heart symbol used to 'favourite' posts, a reply function, a reshare button similar to the retweet function, and the ability to forward posts to private messages.

The promotional images also appear to show a verified user's blue tick carrying over from Instagram to Threads.

Who gets verified is a key point of contention on Twitter, where Musk's leadership stripped users of blue ticks and monetised the service.

In recent days, Musk triggered unrest on Twitter again this week when he announced the platform would limit non-paying users to viewing 600 tweets a day, later increased 1,000.

The Twitter boss said the move was "to address extreme levels of data scraping and system manipulation."

Verified users – who have paid for a subscription to Twitter Blue or are considered “notable” – will be able to read up to 10,000 posts daily after initially being limited to 6,000.

The restrictions could result in users being locked out of Twitter for the day after scrolling through several hundred tweets.

The change brought a fresh round of outrage on Twitter, where users once again vowed to flee the app.

Some Twitter users made an exodus to alternative social media, notably Mastodon, earlier this year after Musk's takeover triggered rounds of lay-offs at Twitter, and a bonfire of the blue ticks.

The change to a paid-for verification system sparked criticism that Twitter, which is widely used by public figures and news outlets, would become vulnerable to widespread fakery.

It is not clear yet whether Threads would limit the number of posts users could view, or include paid subscription or verification add-ons.

According to promotional images, Threads also appears to feature privacy settings allowing users to set their posts to be viewed by the public, only by profiles they follow, or profiles they mention.

Clash of the tech titans

Last month the pair – two of the world’s most high-profile billionaires – agreed to take each other on in a cage fight in an exchange that went viral on social media.

The arrival of the new app comes after Twitter announced TweetDeck is to become the next part of the company to be limited to users who have paid for verified status.

The application, which allows users to manage multiple feeds and searches, will be only be accessible to verified users in 30 days, according to a tweet from Twitter Support on Monday evening.

A new version of TweetDeck has been made available with the tweet giving instructions to update.

[Solauren]

Ah, this must be the cage match that's been discussed

[Broomstick]

However, in the case of recent changes to Twitter, some users have claimed that the amount of requests sent to Twitter as a result of the site being blocked across so many platforms has created a scenario where the servers cannibalize themselves, sending out a massive number of requests for data that have no hope of being fulfilled. Thus a “self-DDoS”.

If this is so I am filled with schadenfreude

Someone had to do it:
Facebook owner Meta launches new social media app 'Threads' to rival Twitter

Hmmm..... "Threads" calls to my mind that movie from the UK back in the Cold War days portraying nuclear war... Wonder if Zuckerberg has ever heard of it, it is before his time. Well, sort of - he would have been a newborn when it came out. I'm sure this app isn't at all creepy.

[Formless]

"Threads" is apparently built upon a lot of the same standards as Mastodon and other Fediverse projects with some (limited) interoperability with Mastadon instances in mind. Knowing that months in advance, many Mastadon admins have already preemptively de-federated and blocked Threads because they don't trust Meta on account of its tolerance of bigotry and abuse of user data. It will be interesting to see which service manages outcompete Twitter in the long run; Meta has the advantage that if you already have an Instagram account you can just sign into Threads with that user ID, but Mastadon has the head start due to both creating the software standard Meta is relying upon, and from already getting a surge of users that were sick of Twitter and Reddit's shit. Hopefully Meta has a bad enough reputation that the convenience will be outweighed by people realizing that Zuckerburg is his own kind of poison just like Elon Musk, and the only good that could happen is if Musk literally kills Zuckerburg in the cage (and even in that unlikely event, Meta is more than just its owner).

[bilateralrope]

Ah, this must be the cage match that's been discussed

Also there was the time SpaceX blew up a $200m Facebook satellite

This $200 million satellite was due to launch on a Falcon 9 rocket in early September, 2016. On the morning of September 1, to save a single day in the pre-launch preparation process, SpaceX had already affixed the satellite atop a Falcon 9 rocket ahead of its static fire test. And the countdown was going smoothly, until it wasn't. Completely out of the blue, the rocket exploded violently, showering pieces of the vehicle into the swamplands for miles around. The satellite swan-dived to the ground, a total, fiery loss.

[bobalot]

Elon Musk supports eliminating voting rights for people without children

What an insufferable dickhead.

[bilateralrope]

Twitter refuses to pay for arbitration it forced on 891 ex-employees, suit says

Meanwhile, at least one Twitter ex-employee has won a rare settlement.
ASHLEY BELANGER - 7/6/2023, 5:12 AM

Twitter started this year with a legal victory that forced thousands of laid-off employees into arbitration. These employees had been suing over grievances like unpaid severance and discrimination, and the win spared Twitter from facing a class-action lawsuit. Now, hundreds of ex-employees have sued again, this time alleging in a class-action claim that "Twitter has refused to engage in arbitration—despite having compelled employees to arbitrate their claims."

According to the complaint, filed Monday in a San Francisco federal court, Twitter won't come to the table simply because the company doesn't want to pay for arbitration. Its arbitration agreements require ex-employees to pay a nominal filing fee to launch claims with the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS), but after that, Twitter has to pay "all other arbitration fees."

Faced with paying perhaps millions in fees for approximately 2,000 laid-off employees, Twitter allegedly sent a letter to JAMS in early June, requesting that the fees instead be split between parties.

However, granting that request would be a breach of JAMS's rules. Thus, JAMS responded by telling Twitter that it would not proceed with any arbitration that did not meet JAMS's standards, the complaint said. After that, Twitter allegedly told JAMS that it "would refuse to proceed with arbitrations in most states outside California," attaching "a list of 891 arbitrations in which it was refusing to proceed."

Twitter's move to avoid paying arbitration fees put hundreds of ex-employees in a seemingly no-win situation, their complaint suggested. They had to choose between waiving Twitter's obligation to pay their arbitration fees or else risk JAMS declining to arbitrate their cases entirely.

Some of them decided instead to pursue a third option, asking a court to compel Twitter to engage in arbitration with "all former Twitter employees throughout the United States who have filed demands for arbitration against Twitter with JAMS."

Twitter did not immediately respond to Ars' request to comment.

A lawyer representing ex-employees, Shannon Liss-Riordan, told Bloomberg that Twitter seemingly didn't realize how high the cost of forcing arbitration with so many employees would be.

She suggested that now that Twitter "has made its bed, it doesn’t want to lie in it."

According to JAMS's website, arbitration fees vary, mostly because of professional fees. Those are based on hourly rates set by individual arbitrators, so it's difficult to accurately measure. However, no matter what, the cost would easily add up. Twitter would have to pay $2,000 per counterclaim, plus be on the hook for professional fees covering all "hearings, pre- and post-hearing reading and research, and award preparation," as well as a case management fee that's 13 percent of professional fees. On the low end, Twitter could end up paying hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of dollars if compelled into arbitration with thousands of employees who have already filed arbitration demands.

It's unclear whether Twitter could successfully duck these fees or if cash-strapped Twitter could simply be putting off paying another bill. The JAMS website notes that the purpose of suspending arbitration is not to give companies an out but to alert former employees so that they "may seek appropriate redress in a court of competent jurisdiction."

Liss-Riordan told Bloomberg that she has continued filing arbitration demands for ex-employees, as well as fielding claims from current employees who recently outed Twitter for never paying promised annual bonuses.

Rare settlement for Twitter ex-employee

While it seems like most employees terminated during Twitter's mass layoffs are struggling to hold Twitter accountable to employee agreements, at least one ex-employee recently secured a win against the penny-pinching social media company.

Twitter has settled with software engineer Alexis Camacho, Bloomberg reported. This settlement comes after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided Camacho was "illegally punished" for their efforts rallying coworkers to protest Twitter owner Elon Musk's return-to-office mandate.

An NLRB spokesperson, Kayla Blado, told Bloomberg that if Twitter didn't settle, the NLRB would have issued a complaint. Federal law protects workers' rights to discuss workplace conditions and take collective action.

The terms of Twitter's settlement with Camacho have not been disclosed. However, Liss-Riordan represented Camacho, too, and she told Bloomberg she was "very pleased" with the "fair resolution" reached in this case.

Liss-Riordan plans to continue pressing Twitter to reach similarly fair resolutions with thousands of other aggrieved laid-off employees. But those battles seem likely to be more drawn out.

“We look forward to vindicating the rights of our remaining clients through litigation, arbitration, and wherever else we can,” Liss-Riordan told Bloomberg.

Ars could not immediately reach Liss-Riordan for comment. [Update: Liss-Riordan told Ars that "Twitter has realized it is facing thousands of arbitration demands and it is going to be extraordinarily expensive to arbitrate the employees’ claims individually," so now "it is declining to proceed with arbitration (except in a few states, such as California)." While "Twitter acknowledges it has to pay all the fees for arbitration in California and some other states," it's claiming "that's not the case in other states"—an argument which JAMS has already rejected, Liss-Riordan said.)

Oh look. Twitter is refusing to pay bills again. It doesn't look like it will go well for them.

[Broomstick]

Musk needs to spend the rest of his life in prison. His hijinks are fucking up the lives of too many other people.

[bilateralrope]

Musk sues law firm because he’s mad that Twitter paid $90 million bill

Musk tries to claw back $90M from firm that forced him to complete Twitter deal.
JON BRODKIN - 7/8/2023, 8:14 AM

Elon Musk's X Corp. this week sued a law firm that Twitter hired last year after Musk tried to break their $44 billion merger agreement. Musk's lawsuit in San Francisco County Superior Court alleges that Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz overcharged Twitter when it collected $90 million—including $84.3 million on the same day Musk completed his purchase of Twitter.

"This action for equitable relief arises out of an effort by Wachtell to fundamentally alter its fee arrangement as litigation counsel in the twilight of its representation of Twitter to obtain an improper bonus payment in violation of its fiduciary and ethical obligations to its client," claimed the lawsuit filed by X Corp., the successor company to Twitter. "Wachtell exploited a corporate client left unprotected by lame duck fiduciaries who had lost their motivation to act in Twitter's best interest pending its imminent sale to Elon Musk and his entities, X Holdings I, Inc. and X Holdings II, Inc."

When Musk tried to pull out of his commitment to buy Twitter, the company hired Wachtell in July 2022 to handle the lawsuit that eventually forced Musk to complete the merger. Musk finally honored the merger contract in October when it became clear that he would likely lose in court.

The Musk/Twitter deal closed on October 27. Wachtell allegedly charged Twitter $90 million for several months of work, with $84.3 million being paid on the day the merger closed. The $90 million fee included earlier invoices totaling nearly $18 million, the lawsuit said.

"Fully aware that nobody with an economic interest in Twitter's financial well-being was minding the store, Wachtell arranged to effectively line its pockets with funds from the company cash register while the keys were being handed over to the Musk Parties," Musk's lawsuit said.

Musk's Twitter apparently hasn't paid many bills since then, as the company is facing more than 20 lawsuits over allegedly unpaid bills for rent and various services. Twitter is also facing lawsuits from ex-employees over unpaid severance and bonuses, and a lawsuit from former CEO Parag Agrawal and other ex-executives over unpaid reimbursements.

$84.3 million mostly a “success fee”

The bulk of the $84.3 million paid to Wachtell on October 27 was allegedly a "success fee" for forcing Musk to close the deal. Musk's lawsuit said it "is impossible to determine what portion of the $90 million total fee due to Wachtell under the Closing Day Letter Agreement represents the referenced success fee." Based on other invoices and accrued fees, the success fee is said to be either $61 million or $72 million.

The X Corp. lawsuit describes how the payment was allegedly approved and paid before Musk could stop it:

In the middle of the board's final October 27 meeting, former Twitter general counsel Sean Edgett sent the chart of fees that the Twitter board was meeting to approve. Upon seeing the magnitude of the fees being presented for the board's approval, one former Twitter director immediately exclaimed in an email reply to Edgett:

O

My

Freaking

God

Despite any initial shock, Twitter's lame duck board members voted to approve Wachtell's excessive and unconscionable fee.

Immediately following the Twitter board's rubber-stamp approval, [Chief Legal Officer Vijaya] Gadde signed Wachtell's letter agreement. Then, to ensure that the eleventh-hour fee payment went through before the Musk Parties (Twitter's new owners) could learn about the massive gift included in that fee, Edgett expedited the wire payment on the invoice for the balance ($84,294,962.97) of the $90 million total fee that Wachtell had submitted to Twitter the day before. Twitter's $84 million wire to Wachtell was posted only ten minutes before Gadde and Edgett were terminated upon the closing of the merger.

Wachtell has previously represented Musk and Tesla in other matters.

Musk asks for full $90 million

The lawsuit accuses Wachtell of unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and violations of California's Business & Professions Code. We contacted Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz today and will update this article if we get a response.

"Due to its egregious violations of its professional duties and applicable ethical rules, Wachtell should be required to forfeit its entire $90 million total fee under the Closing Day Letter Agreement and make restitution in the amount of $90 million," the lawsuit said.

If the court doesn't require Wachtell to forfeit the entire fee, Musk argues that it "should be ordered to make restitution for the difference between the $90 million total fee it received and the reasonable fees it would have received had it adhered to the billing guidelines it agreed upon in the June 21 Engagement Letter."

Wachtell originally "signed an engagement letter for an hourly fee representation" but "failed to obtain a written agreement for any fee tied to the results of the underlying case," Musk's lawsuit alleges. The last-minute success fee indicates that "Wachtell apparently believed that it—unlike other law firms bound by ethical and fiduciary obligations—was free to solicit a handout, aid and abet corporate waste by former Twitter executives in the death throes of their fiduciary roles, and walk away with a total fee that made it $90 million richer," the lawsuit said.

Looks like Musk decided to escalate from not paying bills to trying to claw back money. From a law firm.

This should be fun to watch.

[bobalot]

Judging by the redness of Musk's nose, his hijinks looks like a cocaine fueled binge.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Good luck to him finding any competent litigators willing to represent him, no lawyer worth his salt is going to touch this case without a hefty payment in advance