The MMFA alleged that “X admitted what content the user follows and how long their account is, they can see the ads with extremist content.”
As the MMFA has seen it, after occupying the musk platform, the organization is trying to blame the organization for the loss of advertisements from its decisions. Through legalism, Musk allegedly wants to pay the MMFA “in the losing income of millions of dollars”, “just because his report did not find” whether the accounts of the media have followed it or how many times did he refresh his screen.
His filing states that the MMFA has spent millions to defend the X -selected locations, defending the X -selected locations. If the fighting in the X California is lost, the platform will probably have to pay for the losses caused by the incorporation of legalism outside the venue in its TOS.
The MMFA complaint states that “this spread of claims of the same behavior is abusive,” the MMFA complaint states that the organization will have another hearing in Singapore next month and in Dublin in May. And it “just works more than just raising costs: this means that media matters cannot focus on expanding the best possible defense in their time and resources in a forum, and instead it has to counter the pieces,” which allegedly “maximizes the MMFA’s” ability to defend itself.
The MMFA complaint said, “Media affairs should not defend the media affairs against any efforts to stop the media issues in foreign jurisdictions if the parties are already agreed to the appropriate forum for X’s services.” “This is a court.”
X is still recovering from the ad boycott
Although XK CEO Linda Yakarno began 2025 by indicating the X -advertising boycott expiry, Ars found that External data did not support this result. Recently, business internal Referred to Last month, independent data sources who similarly concluded that when the X’s advertising pool was increasing, its advertising income was still “away” from which Twitter was before the capture of Musk.