Ex Populus, the entity behind the blockchain gaming network Xai, has sued Elon Musk's AI company xAI for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
The lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California accuses xAI of causing market confusion, especially after announcing plans to open a game studio in November 2024, damaging Xai's reputation and goodwill.
MAIN CONTENT
Xai accuses xAI of infringing the XAI trademark used since 06/2023 and causing serious market confusion.
The USPTO has suspended several xAI trademark applications due to the likelihood of confusion with XAI, according to the lawsuit.
Xai requests the cancellation of related xAI applications, damages, and an injunction against the use of the name in the context of gaming and blockchain.
What is Xai's lawsuit against Elon Musk's xAI about?
Xai sues xAI for trademark infringement and unfair competition, claiming that xAI creates market confusion, harming the Xai brand. The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of California, aiming to prevent xAI from using the name in the gaming and blockchain sector.
According to the records, Ex Populus, the Delaware company behind Xai, claims to have used the XAI trademark in commerce in the U.S. since June 2023, including in the blockchain gaming ecosystem and XAI Token. The company argues that Musk's use of 'xAI' has been causing significant confusion, necessitating court intervention.
The lawsuit also demands damages for infringement, cancellation of pending trademark applications from xAI, and an injunction against xAI continuing to use the disputed name in the gaming and blockchain sectors.
“This is a classic case of trademark infringement, requiring the court to intervene to remedy it.”
– Ex Populus, Plaintiff, 21/08/2025, Lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California, source: assets.expopulus.com
What is Xai?
Xai is an Ethereum-based gaming network that provides blockchain infrastructure for game logic, AI-based decisions, rewards, and multi-application data management.
Ex Populus operates the Xai ecosystem, positioning it as an infrastructure layer for digital transactions and gaming, aiming to enhance AI integration capabilities in gameplay and digital asset governance. The use of the XAI trademark since June 2023 is a pillar establishing priority rights in the dispute.
The ecosystem emphasizes scalability for various gaming applications, from on-chain rewards to multi-platform data, creating a context that makes name confusion with xAI particularly risky.
How has Elon Musk's xAI created trademark confusion?
The lawsuit claims that confusion began when Musk announced the xAI company in July 2023 and worsened when xAI announced plans to open a game studio in November 2024.
Xai cites examples of users, the press, and even the AI assistant Grok mistakenly associating the two parties. According to the complaint, many people mistakenly believe that Musk owns, funds, or is associated with the XAI trademark and related products and services, distorting market perception.
Source confusion and sponsorship are central factors in assessing trademark infringement under U.S. law. As both parties move closer to the same field (gaming, AI), the risk of confusion increases, forcing the court to consider urgent measures.
Why does the announcement of the game studio by xAI increase confusion?
The announcement by xAI to open a game studio puts both parties in the same 'distribution channel' and 'target customers', increasing the likelihood of confusion about source and product sponsorship.
In trademark matters, relevance of trade channels and customer groups is an important assessment criterion. As xAI enters gaming, the gap between foundational AI and Xai's blockchain gaming infrastructure narrows, making it easier for users to conflate the origins of services.
The lawsuit notes a series of misleading mentions on social media and the press following the game studio announcement, reinforcing the argument that confusion has occurred, not just the risk.
What is the reputational harm that Xai alleges?
Xai states that damages extend beyond lost goodwill, including negative sentiment from consumers due to Musk's controversial image and xAI products.
This is a form of 'irreparable harm' often cited when seeking a temporary injunction, as it is difficult to quantify in monetary terms. When goodwill is diluted, the brand loses control over customer experience and expectations, resulting in long-lasting effects.
Xai emphasizes that the confusing association with Musk increases negative sentiment, affecting brand positioning in the gaming and cryptocurrency community.
“The plaintiff is not only suffering irreparable harm due to the loss of goodwill associated with the XAI trademark... but is also harmed by the misleading association with Elon Musk, leading to significant negative consumer sentiment.”
– Ex Populus, Plaintiff, 21/08/2025, Lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California, source: assets.expopulus.com
What has Musk's legal team done regarding the trademark?
The lawsuit alleges that Musk's side pressured Ex Populus to abandon its rights, accompanied by threats to cancel registrations in early August 2025.
According to the records, legal exchanges aim to weaken Xai's trademark position. While specific details are not publicly disclosed, the lawsuit describes this as an effort to exert pressure before the dispute is adjudicated.
This situation often arises in trademark disputes, where the later filer seeks to invalidate the earlier trademark based on procedural or usage scope reasons.
What is the status of xAI's trademark applications at the USPTO?
According to the lawsuit, the USPTO has suspended several applications from xAI due to the likelihood of confusion with the previously existing XAI trademark.
Periodic suspensions occur when the examining agency perceives a risk of overlap/confusion, pending resolution of the conflict. This does not determine the outcome but is an unfavorable signal for the later filer during the examination phase.
On the other hand, xAI may still argue or narrow its scope of services. However, if the civil lawsuit establishes infringement/confusion, the prospects for registration will be even more difficult.
What remedies does Xai request from the court?
Xai requests the cancellation of pending applications from xAI, damages for infringement, and an injunction against xAI using the name in the context of gaming and blockchain.
The lawsuit emphasizes that 'there is no legal remedy sufficient to address the scale of harm' that xAI has caused, strengthening the demand for an injunction. The court will consider four factors: likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of interests, and public interest.
If the injunction is granted, xAI may have to change its branding presentation in contexts related to gaming and blockchain.
What legal framework is applied to assess trademark confusion?
The Northern District of California, part of the Ninth Circuit, typically applies Sleekcraft factors to consider the likelihood of confusion between trademarks.
Sleekcraft factors include: strength of the mark, degree of similarity, degree of relatedness of goods/services, channels of trade, actual confusion evidence, defendant's intent, consumer's level of care, and the potential for product expansion. This is the standard framework in the adjudication area.
Reference: AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979); USPTO 'likelihood of confusion' guidelines outline similar criteria in trademark examination.
How does the USPTO understand trademark confusion?
According to the USPTO, confusion arises when consumers may believe that goods or services come from the same source or are related.
In the context of Xai and xAI, the phonetic similarity and both entering the gaming and AI fields could increase confusion risk. However, the final decision rests with the court, based on a comprehensive evaluation of evidence.
Refer to the USPTO's official guidelines on assessing the likelihood of confusion in trademark examination and federal court practices.
Quick comparison table between Xai and xAI in the dispute
The table below summarizes some milestones and characteristics relevant to the lawsuit and public sources.
Criteria Xai (Ex Populus) xAI (Elon Musk) Source Main Field Blockchain gaming network, digital transaction infrastructure General AI company, AI products Lawsuit Ex Populus Usage/Launch Timing Used XAI trademark since 06/2023 xAI announcement: 07/2023 Lawsuit Ex Populus Game Studio Gaming ecosystem, rewards, multi-application data Planned game studio opening: 11/2024 Lawsuit Ex Populus Trademark Status XAI trademark is commercially used Several applications at USPTO suspended due to likelihood of confusion Lawsuit Ex Populus Legal Demands Cancellation of xAI applications, damages, injunction against use of name in game/blockchain – Lawsuit Ex Populus
What is the impact on blockchain game developers and users?
The risk of trademark confusion can disrupt collaborations, integrations, and marketing campaigns, especially when partners require clear identification of technology origins.
For users, confusion can lead to misunderstandings about security, support, or rights within the gaming ecosystem and digital assets. Developers should clarify brand names, scope of use, and legal records when entering contracts.
Experience shows that transparent branding and trademark usage terms in all partner documents help reduce legal risks and impact user trust.
Main and related reference sources
– Ex Populus lawsuit in the Northern District of California, 21/08/2025: public documents from the plaintiff.
– Guidelines on likelihood of confusion, USPTO, 2024: trademark examination principles.
– Precedent AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979): the Sleekcraft factors in the Ninth Circuit.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Xai suing xAI for?
Xai accuses xAI of trademark infringement and unfair competition, causing confusion about the origin of services, especially as xAI ventures into gaming. Source: Ex Populus lawsuit.
What actions has the USPTO taken?
According to the lawsuit, the USPTO has suspended several xAI trademark applications due to the likelihood of confusion with XAI. This is not a final ruling, but an unfavorable signal for xAI.
What does Xai request from the court?
Cancellation of related xAI applications, damages, and an injunction against xAI using the disputed name in gaming and blockchain. Source: Ex Populus lawsuit.
What factors will the court consider regarding confusion?
The Ninth Circuit typically applies Sleekcraft factors: similarity of marks, relatedness of goods/services, channels of trade, evidence of confusion, intent, etc. Source: AMF v. Sleekcraft.
How does this affect the blockchain gaming community?
Confusion can cause delays in collaboration, affecting marketing and identity. Developers should increase branding transparency and trademark usage terms to mitigate risk.
Source: https://tintucbitcoin.com/xai-kien-xai-xam-pham-nhan-hieu/
Thank you for reading this article!
Please Like, Comment, and Follow TinTucBitcoin to stay updated with the latest news about the cryptocurrency market and not miss any important information!
