The New York Times is reporting (source below), that an Employer is suing an ex-employee over a 17,000 follower Twitter Account for $340,000. This has serious implications in courts deciding the value of a Twitter follower to a Brand and the company oversight of social media accounts.
Regardless of what the details of this Complaint are, its a major sign that companies need to take their social media accounts seriously. In this case it would appear that the company realized that a social media account has value much like a customer list. Your Social Media Accounts are PROPERTY. They are virtual online real estate. They have value to your Brand. Your company should be protecting its social media accounts with contracts and controls. Its also a note to quitting employees that if the company says you can have the account, as always get it in writing.
In The New York Times Article: PhoneDog Media declined to comment for this article except for this statement: “The costs and resources invested by PhoneDog Media into growing its followers, fans and general brand awareness through social media are substantial and are cnsidered property of PhoneDog Media L.L.C. We intend to aggressively protect our customer lists and confidential information, intellectual property, trademark and brands.”
“This will establish precedent in the online world, as it relates to ownership of social media accounts,” said Henry J. Cittone, a lawyer in New York who litigates intellectual property disputes. “We’ve actually been waiting to see such a case as many of our clients are concerned about the ownership of social media accounts vis-á-vis their branding.”
As a company you wouldn’t likely let an employee leave your employment, taking company property with them. The same is the case with your Social Accounts. In fact, AS these accounts are initially setup, legal contracts as to ownership and control etc. should be in writing and PRE-established. Tell me what you think in the comments?
Source: http://www.nytimes.com
It’s unfortunate that companies still aren’t realizing how important online branding is and taking steps to protect it. I am curious however at how they came up with $2.50 per contact.
In my recruiting business, I have clients in Data Governance software, It sounds great but very few companies have made any serious traction into implementation. As for $2.50, I have an affiliate client who use $2.00 as cost of customer acquisition.
Very good article. Just one comment. In the legal sense a brand is a trade mark (even if it is no registered, it is a common law trademark), trade marks are not property, but a limited right (or privilege) that allow certain privileges usage. List can often be trade secrets, even in case of a twitter account, when the lists are public, there is obviously no secret that can be protected.
I wouldn’t sell my twitter followers for $20 bucks apiece either.
Yep you kinda get an idea of what kind of Pandoras box is open here.
Interesting post
further highlights the need for new jurisprudence on social media
yet as you said the landscape is still evolving so it is quite difficult to put sticks in the ground yet
However I guess the angle is not to consider the list per se but rather the value of the list which can now be established as the median value of each contact – Methods to do just that are evolving fast but I do not think that one value can be retained whatever the company involved as was suggested elsewhere in the comments.
Too many parameters are by essence variable according to the cost of acquiring contacts ( in house or outsourced) and resulting sales .
looking forward to you keeping us up to date with the judgement and the arguments retained Chris !
Take care
entre2nuages
then he should have gotten the money to release them
Just add this to the list of things that will make lawyers rich and create more fear in the online world.
When you fire someone, you change all their passwords and access to any properties before you let them go. No one is more malicious than an employee that has left of their own or fired.
And if you are not capable of firing employees then you should not be in business. I explain this heavily to my corporate consulting clients, give access but always maintain control and as employees leave that have had access you must update with new passwords for everyone.
Also NDA’s and DNC Non Disclosure and Do Not Compete’s are a must too. As always, I am not a lawyer, I don’t give legal advice and I don’t play one on TV. I always suggest having a contract attorney handle all legal matters and advise you properly.
Thanks for the share and Google+ post Debbie!
Another reason to NOT work for anyone but yourself.
If I hire someone to manage my social media, that person understands a new set of accounts are created. Everything tweeted, posted, liked on those accounts are the property of my company. You as the person hired, do not own and have not right to that property. In my business, this is explicitely expressed.
Saves me time and headache. Saves the other person time in understanding how my company works around social media.
For me it’s hard to fathom all the variable’s that needs to be taken into account and come to an absolute and definite resolution.
Much will depend on if this is argued on the basis of customer lists (corporate data) or the brand trade-mark.
And, if customer lists … aren’t those (in this case) property of Twitter?
Whatever the outcome, it’s clear that a critical section of any business’ social media strategy and implementation plan needs to include clear documentation on ownership of accounts and admin procedures if the social media admin/manager leaves.
There might also be a reason for Facebook/Twitter to make it easier for any/all brands to be “verified” … and for Google to start doing it – currently anyone can create Google+ business pages with same names. Hopefully they’ll address this when they allow vanity URLs?
This is how it should be and needs to be laid out and explained. Its not like Joe Blow set up @joeblow for personal use he did @companyname for company use
If you we are talking about social network site accounts, how would you change the password? Once the employee has access to the account, they can change the email, password, and anything else associated with the account. You can only control systems that are completely in-house, unless you have agreements with the social site that give you access regardless of who knows the passwords or to which email addresses they are connected.
As for non-compete, I would never sign one. What gives you (the company) the right to decide who I can work for or with when I leave? If they don’t see the value of the employee, and someone else does, oh well – they lose. The social contract cannot be one-way.
Agree.
Since Facebook and Twitter accounts can be deleted at any time by the owners, I.E. Facebook and Twitter, we did not pay for these accounts therefore they belong to the owners not us.
Well. that is the field I am interested in regards to law and why I obtained a law degree 🙂 Unfortunately, law is not keeping track with technology and where parliaments pass bills they are usually very lopsided for the highest paying lobby and not in a balance that would bring society and the law into a better position.
Lots of work to inform here. Thanks for the article!
Then Patcii, I would not be hiring you then. And neither would anyone else that knows what they are doing.
When I do consults with Corporate clients, I sign DNCs and NDAs myself.
When I take on say a PA, I am not going to teach them the business and then watch them leave with my contact list, the inner workings of my business and then compete with me.
As far as changing the password goes, that is all part of the contracting process and you need to set someone up in your organization that overseas maintaining the password structure.
I advise on the all the time. In fact I tell my clients to change all corporate passwords every month.
Did anyone see the interview on CNN later the day Chris Voss wrote this? The guy and the company are getting more press out of this than $340,000 could ever buy on TV :]
I agree, but we all work for someone Michael. I think the ability to add and reomove admins on Google+ pages is a great step in the right direction to solving this in the future.
I am assuming that you support that with the proper legal documents as well Ellen?
I absolutely agree that social media accounts are company properties. But unfortunately, I have seen too many of clients lose access to their own accounts due an employee leaving and not passing on the login info. This kind of behavior by ex-employees is not only unprofessional but also extremely unethical. It’s sad when suing is the last resort for issues like this, but the company should definitely go after their virtual properties.
What I’m not seeing above with absolute clarity is whether or not the employee had his own personal twitter account and promoted the brand in his own personal twitter account – or – was it truly a twitter account that is officially the branding account for the company. If he has his own personal account and has been talented enough to have a command to promote the business’ brand, he shouldn’t be penalized for having a following. After all, in order to have an account that actually builds (even if focused upon a cause and/or brand), it takes more than just tweeting about their own brand. It takes time to build an account and a bit of strategy.
If it is a company account, then social media needs to be able to meet the demands of the employer accounts and have the ability to establish a primary password that can only be changed by IT/HR and a secondary password that, even if the employee is released, it won’t affect the account (similar to logging into a company computer). If the employer doesn’t have this ability, how does the company stand to truly establish ownership over the social media account?
It does stand to pose some interesting questions indeed. I do think it needs to be clearer whether the account was established as a personal account, or as a company account – and what steps did the company do to maintain control over the social media account?
Definitely one to watch. Curious where courts will draw the line in situations without documentation. With a trend towards companies encouraging individuals to grow their personal brand online to benefit the employer (ie. in sales positions), when does the account become company property? Looking forward to hearing the outcome – thanks for keeping us informed Chris.