Summary

  • X has filed a lawsuit against Vivek Kumar Sen, Zamyang Sherpa, and others in London's High Court on September 17, claiming that a bot network misappropriated at least £207,384 ($278,000) from its Creator Revenue Sharing program.
  • Allegations suggest that six accounts, along with at least three additional booster accounts, posted nearly identical Bitcoin content just seconds apart while using Stripe accounts with inconsistent names.
  • On September 7, X terminated the program and launched Original Content Rewards, which prohibits earnings from "artificially generated" engagements.

X is pursuing legal action against two individuals believed to be operating a coordinated bot network that defrauded its creator payout initiative, as detailed in a complaint submitted to a United Kingdom High Court on September 17.

The lawsuit names Vivek Kumar Sen, Zamyang Sherpa, and several unnamed individuals, accusing them of managing six accounts linked together to create false engagement on Bitcoin-related posts, thereby unlocking Creator Revenue Sharing payouts. This program was active from July 2023 until its closure on September 7, 2026.

Myriad: Predict Bitcoin's next peak. Make your prediction here. post on Sunday. He stated, "Last week, X took legal action against several individuals who exploited Creator Revenue Sharing by managing a coordinated network of accounts, posting inauthentic content to manipulate engagement, and utilizing multiple bank accounts to conceal their activities. We will not tolerate fraudulent actions on X and will take decisive steps to safeguard our platform and the earnings of legitimate creators."

Creator Revenue Sharing distributes a portion of ad revenue based on user engagement metrics such as likes, replies, and reposts. To qualify for this program, an account must hold an X Premium subscription, achieve five million impressions over three months, and have at least 500 verified followers.

The lawsuit asserts that accounts like @Vivek4real_, @saylordocs, and @TrendingBitcoin, created between 2023 and 2026, cross-posted identical content and engaged with one another’s tweets to fabricate an impression of an engaged audience.

Specific examples of their tactics are highlighted in the lawsuit. For instance, on October 10, 2025, it is alleged that two accounts published the identical phrase, "Like, if you are not selling #Bitcoin," along with the same chart just two minutes apart, among other near-simultaneous posts.

Other methods involved duplicating posts and replies across accounts.

To receive payouts, a Stripe account must be linked, which is the payment processor used by the platform. X claims that the names associated with the Stripe accounts did not correspond with the account holders: for example, one account's Stripe profile indicated "Stefan Mann," while the linked bank account and email were traced back to Sen. Both individuals are reportedly based in Preston, England, despite their accounts appearing to be separate entities.

X also alleges that Sen attempted to expand this operation by recruiting other accounts with large followings. In one cited message, Sen reportedly stated: "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."

On August 18, X suspended all nine implicated accounts. According to X's Authenticity Policy, referenced in the complaint, the platform prohibits any actions that aim to manipulate its services through inauthentic accounts, behaviors, or content.

This is not X's first encounter with alleged misconduct. Last year, it filed a lawsuit against a bribery network

The lawsuit claims deceit, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy using unlawful means—a legal claim in the UK for those colluding to cause financial harm through illegitimate methods. X also seeks a constructive trust, asserting that the funds should still belong to X even after being transferred between accounts.

X is demanding the return of the $278,000, along with damages, interest, and legal fees, in addition to at least £75,000 spent on the investigation. The case is proceeding under claim number BL-2026-001161, with no defense submitted as of September 21.