In a courtroom drama nearly a decade in the making, X Corp. (formerly Twitter) told a Texas jury Monday that it crafted its video-sharing systems through innovation and sweat equity — not stolen blueprints — as it fends off a $632 million intellectual property lawsuit brought by VidStream over two patents acquired from a defunct tech company.
The case, now unfolding in a Dallas federal courtroom, pits the social media platform against VidStream in a high-stakes showdown over whether X built its user video-sharing features from scratch or borrowed from patented technology without a license. VidStream claims X owes hundreds of millions for allegedly infringing on U.S. Patent Nos. 8,464,304 and 8,601,506, which it purchased from Youtoo Technologies LLC, a now-bankrupt startup.
Opening Salvos: Innovation vs. Opportunism
X: “They’re Trying to Claim Credit for What We Created”
Matthew Martens of WilmerHale, representing X, painted VidStream as a patent opportunist in opening arguments, telling jurors that the plaintiff “bought patents for the express purpose of suing X.”
He emphasized that X had zero interest in Youtoo’s technology, which was designed to allow users to share videos with television networks — an avenue X deliberately avoided to steer clear of competing with TV giants.
“X is about commentary and community,” Martens said. “VidStream is trying to rewrite history and take credit for what Twitter did.”
X’s legal team highlighted the company’s own history of tech acquisitions, including the 2012 purchase of Vine, to argue that X was willing to pay for innovation — just not for something it never used.
And while meetings with Youtoo did occur, Martens said they were part of a broader due diligence routine: “We met with hundreds of small tech companies back then.” Crucially, he noted, Youtoo never accused X of infringement during those talks.
