After Two-Year Legal Battle with Advertisers, Elon Musk's X Platform Reaches Settlement with World Federation of Advertisers

The nearly two-year legal dispute between Elon Musk's social media platform X and the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) has officially concluded. On the 30th, both parties jointly announced they have reached a settlement regarding the antitrust lawsuit involving advertisers' alleged coordinated reduction or cessation of advertising on the platform, marking a reset in their relationship and closing one of the most high-profile legal battles in the digital advertising market in recent years.

At the heart of this case was the now-dissolved Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM). X claimed that multiple large corporations coordinated through GARM—a body under WFA—to collectively reduce or halt advertising on its platform, constituting an illegal group boycott in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. WFA, however, consistently denied any illegal collusion.

X and WFA jointly announced the resolution of their legal dispute. In a joint statement, they confirmed the formal settlement of all legal issues and expressed their intention to rebuild their relationship, seeking continued dialogue on brand safety and the development of the digital advertising ecosystem.

WFA emphasized in the statement that support for freedom of expression has always been a core principle of the organization, enshrined in its charter since its founding in 1953, and noted that this aligns with X's stated values.

Additionally, WFA reaffirmed that it permanently terminated the GARM initiative in August 2024 and will neither revive the organization nor establish any new mechanism with similar purpose or function.

X had previously filed an antitrust lawsuit in 2024, alleging that major multinational corporations—including Mars, CVS Health, and Colgate-Palmolive—coordinated under WFA’s GARM framework to collectively stop or significantly reduce ad spending on X. X argued that despite differing views on content moderation policies, these companies acted in unison through GARM, resulting in the loss of billions of dollars in advertising revenue. X claimed this went beyond individual corporate decisions and amounted to an illegal boycott under competition law, seeking legal accountability.

X asserted that advertisers did not independently decide on ad placements but instead coordinated commercial strategies under a shared framework, causing significant economic harm to the platform.

However, in March 2025, U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle in Dallas, Texas, dismissed X’s antitrust lawsuit, ruling that X failed to provide sufficient evidence to meet the legal requirements under U.S. federal antitrust laws. This decision was a major setback for X and effectively halted its legal campaign against the multinational corporations and WFA.

GARM was established in 2019 by the World Federation of Advertisers to create consistent global standards for brand safety in the digital advertising space. As platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and X (formerly Twitter) grew rapidly, global brands became increasingly concerned about their ads appearing alongside hate speech, violence, extremism, and misinformation, which could damage their reputations.

GARM’s primary role was to develop common guidelines to help brands, advertising agencies, and digital platforms reduce the risk of ads appearing next to harmful content—not to directly determine whether companies should advertise.

However, after Musk acquired Twitter in late 2022 and rebranded it as X, the platform made significant changes to its content moderation policies, including relaxing account management rules and revising content review systems. This sparked concerns among some advertisers about brand safety, leading many to scale back ad spending and impacting X’s ad revenue.

X argued that these coordinated pullbacks occurred under the GARM framework rather than through independent business judgment, prompting the antitrust lawsuit.

In the joint statement, X and WFA acknowledged that brand safety remains a critical issue in the digital advertising market and agreed to continue promoting innovation in related technologies and systems. They noted that improving brand safety mechanisms would not only help businesses advertise with greater confidence but also enhance ad quality on digital platforms and improve users’ online experiences.

The settlement signifies a shift from courtroom litigation to a new phase of cooperation and institutional development on issues involving content moderation, brand safety, advertising, and antitrust concerns.