My Favorite Risk Factors in the Twitter S-1

Yesterday's post laid out five initial thoughts about the Twitter S-1. Here now are My Favorite Risk FactorsTM from Twitter's filing of last week.

  1. "We generate a substantial majority of our revenue based upon engagement by our users with the ads that we display. If people do not perceive our products and services to be useful, reliable and trustworthy, we may not be able to attract users or increase the frequency of their engagement with our platform and the ads that we display. A number of consumer-oriented websites that achieved early popularity have since seen their user bases or levels of engagement decline, in some cases precipitously. There is no guarantee that we will not experience a similar erosion of our user base or engagement levels. A number of factors could potentially negatively affect user growth and engagement, including if . . . users believe that their experience is diminished as a result of the decisions we make with respect to the frequency, relevance and prominence of ads that we display[.]"
  2. G564001ifc"We seek to foster a broad and engaged user community, and we encourage world leaders, government officials, celebrities, athletes, journalists, sports teams, media outlets and brands to use our products and services to express their views to broad audiences. . . . If we experience a decline in the number of users or a decline in user engagement, including as a result of the loss of world leaders, government officials, celebrities, athletes, journalists, sports teams, media outlets and brands who generate content on Twitter, advertisers may not view our products and services as attractive for their marketing expenditures, and may reduce their spending with us which would harm our business and operating results."
  3. "The substantial majority of our revenue is currently generated from third parties advertising on Twitter. We generated 85% and 87% of our revenue from advertising in 2012 and the six months ended June 30, 2013, respectively. We generate substantially all of our advertising revenue through the sale of our three Promoted Products: Promoted Tweets, Promoted Accounts and Promoted Trends. . . . Our advertising revenue could be adversely affected by a number of other factors, including . . . our inability to help advertisers effectively target ads, including as a result of the fact that we do not collect extensive private personally identifiable information directly from our users and that we do not have real-time geographic information for all of our users [and] the impact of new technologies that could block or obscure the display of our ads[.]"
  4. "In order to deliver high quality products and services, it is important that our products and services work well with a range of operating systems, networks, devices, web browsers and standards that we do not control."
  5. "[W]e face challenges in providing certain advertising products, features or analytics in certain international markets, such as the European Union, due to government regulation."
  6. “'Spam' on Twitter refers to a range of abusive activities that are prohibited by our terms of service and is generally defined as unsolicited, repeated actions that negatively impact other users with the general goal of drawing user attention to a given account, site, product or idea. This includes posting large numbers of unsolicited mentions of a user, duplicate Tweets, misleading links (e.g., to malware or click-jacking pages) or other false or misleading content, and aggressively following and un-following accounts, adding users to lists, sending invitations, retweeting and favoriting Tweets to inappropriately attract attention. Our terms of service also prohibit the creation of serial or bulk accounts, both manually or using automation, for disruptive or abusive purposes, such as to tweet spam or to artificially inflate the popularity of users seeking to promote themselves on Twitter. Although we continue to invest resources to reduce spam on Twitter, we expect spammers will continue to seek ways to act inappropriately on our platform. In addition, we expect that increases in the number of users on our platform will result in increased efforts by spammers to misuse our platform. We continuously combat spam, including by suspending or terminating accounts we believe to be spammers and launching algorithmic changes focused on curbing abusive activities. Our actions to combat spam require the diversion of significant time and focus of our engineering team from improving our products and services. If spam increases on Twitter, this could hurt our reputation for delivering relevant content or reduce user growth and user engagement and result in continuing operational cost to us."
  7. "As of June 30, 2013, we had approximately 2,000 employees, an increase of over 1,800 employees since January 1, 2010."
  8. "There is . . . a risk that one or more of our trademarks could become generic, which could result in them being declared invalid or unenforceable. For example, there is a risk that the word “Tweet” could become so commonly used that it becomes synonymous with any short comment posted publicly on the Internet, and if this happens, we could lose protection of this trademark."
  9. "Our Innovator’s Patent Agreement, or IPA, also limits our ability to prevent infringement of our patents. In May 2013, we implemented the IPA, which we enter into with our employees and consultants, including our founders. The IPA, which applies to our current and future patents, allows us to assert our patents defensively. The IPA also allows us to assert our patents offensively with the permission of the inventors of the applicable patent. . . . While we may be able to claim protection of our intellectual property under other rights, such as trade secrets or contractual obligations with our employees not to disclose or use confidential information, we may be unable to assert our patent rights against third parties that we believe are infringing our patents, even if such third parties are developing products and services that compete with our products and services. For example, in the event that an inventor of one of our patents leaves us for another company and uses our patented technology to compete with us, we would not be able to assert that patent against such other company unless the assertion of the patent right is for a defensive purpose. . . . In addition, the terms of the IPA could affect our ability to monetize our intellectual property portfolio."

On the risk factor about Twitter's innovative IP agreement with its employee inventors, see this prior post, Patent Experts Disassemble Twitter's Employee Patent Assignment.


blog comments powered by Disqus