Lawyers for Elon Musk and Twitter on Wednesday cited the latest revelations of Pitcher’s warning and gave an overview of the arguments they could make during a hearing on whether to force the entrepreneur to buy the social network.
Mr. Musk’s representative tried to convince Kathleen McCormick, the judge in charge of the case.
But the billionaire wants to arrange them in his own way, after all, he should have heard them before agreeing to buy the company, replied Bradley Wilson, the lawyer of the site.
The two sides met to discuss information to be shared ahead of a trial scheduled for October.
Mr. Asks Musk’s team.
But Twitter’s lawyer responded that the request was not “relevant” because the site always presented the figure as an “estimate” in official documents.
And the most recent published in February, “Mr. Musk before contacting Twitter about potential acquisition.”
Twitter Mr. Even if all of Musk’s requests were granted, it would represent “trillions and billions of data points,” Mr. Wilson pointed out. And it may violate the rules of the platform or even some laws related to the protection of personal data.
– “Due to bonus” –
Platform Mr. He acknowledged that limited data related to 9,000 accounts and a quarter could be shared with Musk — not the public. But Mr Musk’s team mostly wants to “do their own number and see if they can come up with a different number”.
However, Mr. Musk’s team isn’t the only one seeking clarity on the matter: According to a document made public on Wednesday, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) asked Twitter in mid-June to provide his details. Method to identify fake accounts and other spam.
Mr. Musk’s attorney, Alex Spiro, accused the site of publicly highlighting the number of so-called daily active users who could “monetize” its financial results.
But Twitter always takes into account other criteria to evaluate its performance in its financial decisions, although the group is not required to describe them, a lawyer for the social network responded.
“They have an economic incentive to cheat”, Mr. Spiro insisted before referring to a whistleblower complaint, the former chief of security at the platform, sent to US authorities in early July and made public on Tuesday.
“As (Peiter) Zatko says, because of bonuses, because of stakeholder groups, management doesn’t want to properly measure the spread of bots (accounts managed by software and not human, author reference),” he advanced.
His team asked the whistleblower to testify, but Twitter, which fired him in January, refused, arguing it was “inappropriate,” the attorney lamented.
On the other hand, the Senate committee, which felt it was important to hear from this former hacker, also known as “Mudge”, called for a hearing on September 13.
The whistleblower’s allegations were mentioned during a Twitter executive meeting with employees on Wednesday, the company’s boss, Mr. US media reported that Jatko condemned the “false view”.
The judge did not say when he would rule.