USD
X Sues Alleged Bitcoin Engagement Network Over £207,384 in Creator Payouts
London case targets six principal crypto accounts accused of coordinated revenue-sharing fraud
TL;DR
- X filed a Sept. 17, 2026, lawsuit seeking £207,384 in creator payouts from two users it accuses of operating coordinated Bitcoin-focused accounts.
- X alleges six principal accounts and three supporting accounts used fake or unverified headlines and coordinated engagement to increase Creator Revenue Sharing payments.
- The company is also seeking at least £75,000 for investigation, analysis, remediation and prevention costs, along with additional damages, interest and legal costs.
Trade smarter on Jupiter, Solana’s leading DEX built for fast execution and deep liquidity.
Swap tokens at competitive rates, route across multiple liquidity sources automatically, and access perpetuals, DCA, and advanced trading tools — all in one place!
X Internet Unlimited Company and X Corp sued Vivek Kumar Sen and Zamyang Sherpa in London, alleging they operated a coordinated network of Bitcoin-focused accounts that manipulated engagement to obtain £207,384, or approximately $277,000, through X’s Creator Revenue Sharing program. The case, filed in the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales under case number BL-2026-001161, also names “persons unknown” who allegedly assisted with the operation.
Lewis Silkin LLP represents X in the litigation.
X alleges that six principal accounts operated as part of the scheme: @Vivek4real_, @Bitcoin_Teddy, @saylordocs, @TrendingBitcoin, @Kalshibacktest and @PolyBackTest. Payment information allegedly connects the first three accounts to Sen and the latter three to Sherpa. Three additional accounts — @BTC_Vibes, @MrSuperBitcoin and @Laserlump — appear in Annex A of the filing and are accused of repeatedly liking, replying to and reposting content from the principal accounts.
X alleges coordinated headlines and engagement
X says the accounts published fake or unverified “breaking” financial headlines that were designed to attract attention, with some posts appearing virtually identical or matching word for word. Examples cited in the case include an unsupported claim that Goldman Sachs’ CEO was pushing a crypto bill and another claim that Citibank had purchased $12.6 million worth of bitcoin.
The company points to repeated timing patterns as evidence of coordination. On Aug. 5, 2026, @Vivek4real_ and @TrendingBitcoin allegedly published almost the same message only 11 seconds apart. X also cites similar posting behavior on July 23, July 26 and Aug. 3, 2026.
Another example cited by X occurred on Aug. 13, 2026, when @Vivek4real_, @saylordocs and @Bitcoin_Teddy allegedly responded to the same third-party post within 31 seconds. X further alleges that the accounts systematically liked, replied to and reposted one another’s content, creating engagement that appeared organic while being generated by related accounts.
That engagement had a direct connection to X’s creator-payment system. Eligibility for Creator Revenue Sharing required an account to subscribe to X Premium, record more than 5 million organic impressions during a three-month period and maintain more than 500 verified followers.
The filing details the creator payouts X attributes to the six principal accounts:
Payment and technical data allegedly linked the accounts
X alleges that the operators used different identities across creator accounts and payment infrastructure while technical and financial data tied those arrangements back to the defendants. The company says Stripe accounts associated with the X accounts carried different or mismatched names, while bank-account, email and technical information allegedly connected them to Sen or Sherpa.
X cites @Bitcoin_Teddy as one example. The associated Stripe account was allegedly registered under the name “Stefan Mann,” while the bank account linked to that Stripe account was in Sen’s name. X says the associated email address also pointed to Sen.
The company further alleges that supposedly separate X accounts shared technical identifiers, including devices, software clients, cookies and other login or usage identifiers. X relies on those overlaps, along with the payment records and posting patterns, to support its claim that accounts presented as independent identities were operated through a smaller group.
X also alleges that @Vivek4real_ offered paid engagement or manipulation services to third parties and solicited purchases of accounts with substantial follower bases. The filing cites a message Sen allegedly sent while discussing an account purchase: “Can we continue on another channel, please, as you haven't enabled encrypted chat and I don't want us to get in trouble for something X doesn't allow. If you understand what I mean.”
X suspended the accounts before filing suit
X suspended or terminated the accounts on Aug. 18, 2026, citing “coordinated revenue sharing fraud and platform manipulation.” The enforcement came as the company was winding down its former Creator Revenue Sharing structure.
New sign-ups to Creator Revenue Sharing stopped on Aug. 7, 2026. Creators who were already enrolled were allowed to continue earning through approximately Sept. 7, and X was expected to issue a final payment under the former structure around Sept. 11.
Around the end of that earning period, Creator Revenue Sharing was replaced by Original Content Rewards. The replacement system ties compensation to qualified impressions from Premium subscribers and excludes fraudulent, paid or artificially generated impressions.
X is seeking repayment of the creator earnings as well as at least £75,000, approximately $100,000, for investigation, analysis, remediation and prevention costs. The company says its complete losses and expenses had not yet been quantified when the claim was filed, meaning the amount sought for those costs could rise.
The causes of action attributed to X include deceit, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and unlawful means conspiracy. X is also seeking interest under Section 35A of the Senior Courts Act 1981 and recovery of legal costs. X Senior Legal Directors Diego de Lima Gualda and Adam Mehes signed the particulars of claim.
The allegations have not been established in court. The supplied information does not identify a judgment, admission of liability or settlement involving Sen, Sherpa or the unidentified defendants.
The case follows X’s wider effort during 2026 to tighten rules around crypto spam and engagement farming under product head Nikita Bier. The supplied information also states that Elon Musk’s xAI acquired X in a $33 billion transaction the previous year.
This article has been refined and enhanced by ChatGPT.
