Is this case just absolutely unnecessary or does PhoneDog have a valid argument?

A former employee, Noah Kravitz of the company is being sued for $327 000 because when he switched jobs, he took all his 17 000 Twitter followers with him that he had acquired under the name PhoneDog. Since then he has changed the account name and gained more followers. This case raises questions on the value of Twitter to companies that are increasingly using it as a way to engage with their target market.

PhoneDog is asking for $2.50 per month for each follower for the eight months he worked there. Their argument is clear, that the followers are a customer database and the dollar value is how much each is worth to the company.

Lawyers believe that if damages are rewarded against Noah Kravitz  it will set a precedent for ‘assigning a commercial value to twitter followers acquired in business’.

In July of 2011  BBC political correspondent Laura Kuenssbery did the same thing when she switched places of employment. It raised the question whether the rights to her followers were vested in her as an individual or as a BBC reporter. It also raises the debate whether a public account made up of public followers can really be owned by someone.

We would love to hear your thoughts on the issue. And whilst  you’re at it why not follow us on twitter

Information for this article was sourced from PSFK.