Twitter will not be able to pay its $1.092 million bill in non-expiring software contracts until late 2024, according to the lawsuit, and the Elon Musk-led company apparently demands an additional $7 million worth of payments from vendors. I intend to
Imply Data, Inc. sued Twitter in California Superior Court in San Francisco County, alleging breach of contract. The lawsuit was filed on Tuesday (see the complaint), Bloomberg reported today.
“For more than four years, Imply has licensed its proprietary software to Twitter, and Twitter has paid Imply over $10 million,” the lawsuit states. “Twitter has always been very satisfied with Imply’s products and their associated maintenance and support services, and in mid-2021 both parties agreed to extend the term of the software license and services agreement from October 1, 2021 until he is in September. Extended for another 3 years: 30/30/2024.
In May, weeks after Musk closed the deal to buy Twitter, the company notified Imply Data that it would not renew the deal again, but that “the license agreement remains in ‘full force and effect’ until the end of the contract term. “Continued to have ‘admitted ‘September 30, 2024,’” the lawsuit said.
Payments stopped after Musk took over
Twitter continued to make quarterly payments until Musk completed the purchase in late October. “However, shortly after Musk’s acquisition of Twitter was completed, Twitter refused to pay its outstanding quarterly bills due November 30, 2022, and despite the clear language in its software license, Twitter has waived its obligation to pay future invoices from Imply and its service agreement requiring Twitter to do so,” the lawsuit said.
Imply creates databases based on the Apache Druid open source software and products for managing and monitoring Druid clusters.
The New York Times reported on Nov. 22 that Twitter is putting some vendors on edge. Imply’s complaint cites reports that Twitter refused to pay vendors, saying that “this lawsuit involves such egregious incidents.”
Imply uploaded an invoice for $1,092,000 to Twitter’s vendor portal, and the invoice was approved by Twitter on October 5, the lawsuit states. “On November 28, 2022, when Imply accessed the vendor portal, Imply learned that Twitter had deleted the invoice and terminated the license agreement,” the lawsuit states.
“I won’t pay Imply anymore”
Imply said Twitter “also uploaded an internal email chain to the vendor portal to support these actions.” According to the complaint, the series of emails included a message from Martin O’Neill, Twitter’s head of global strategic procurement, stating, “We would like to inform you that we will no longer be making payments to Imply. If you can flag it in the AP system, please do not forward the invoice for approval.Thank you.”
Twitter executive Christina Bravo, who received the email, “forwarded the email to another Twitter employee and wrote: ‘All invoices for imply currently pending at Oracle (if If so, could you please cancel and void the supplier using the email below as evidence?”
After reviewing those emails, Imply took to Twitter to ask about the status of the November 30th payment. [Imply’s] Twitter business partner. Imply took to her Twitter to discuss canceling the bill. But Twitter has yet to respond substantively to its outreach,” the lawsuit said.
Imply seeks monetary damages for breach of contract. “Imply expects Twitter’s breaches to continue and the amount of defaults to increase each quarter until the term of the license agreement expires… which will exceed $8 million,” Imply said. said in court.
Controversy over whether Twitter can terminate the deal
The lawsuit also alleges violations of good faith and fair dealing covenants, and anticipatory denials. The latter term describes when the parties to a contract declare that they do not intend to fulfill their contractual obligations.
“Twitter has explicitly violated its license agreement by declaring that Twitter will not pay Imply, instructing employees not to approve invoices, and disabling Imply through the vendor portal. It expressly and completely disclaims and waives that Twitter has thereby violated its license agreement,” the lawsuit said.
Twitter may argue that it had the right to terminate the agreement early. Imply’s complaint asks “whether Twitter had the right to unilaterally terminate before the term of the license agreement expires.” , said there was a dispute between the two companies. Imply seeks a declaratory judgment that Twitter has no right to do so.
We reached out to Twitter about the lawsuit, but the company reportedly dismantled its public relations team after Musk took over.