Most companies now utilize social media as a critical marketing vehicle. However, many times the job of managing a company's social media account is poorly defined. This can lead to problems when an employee or contractor charged with managing a social media campaign leaves. In fact, it is possible that social media followers may be treated as company trade secrets under common law or California's Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("CUTSA").
In the case of Phonedog v. Kravitz, Phonedog is suing its former employee/contractor Kravitz for allegedly converting a Phonedog Twitter feed to Kravitz's own personal use. Kravitz had previously set up the company's Twitter feed and tweeted regarding the company. Kravitz filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit but a federal judge has decided Phonedog may proceed with its California trade secrets litigation. Phonedog is claiming, among other things, that the followers of the Twitter feed constitute company trade secrets with an independent economic value. Phonedog is claiming over $300,000 in damages.
In the wake of this lawsuit, companies like Phonedog should consult with a California trade secrets lawyer who can provide advice or representation in litigation. A fundamental step would be to insert terms into employment contracts and NDA's which make clear that social media content belongs to a company and that social media followers constitute trade secrets. That way, the company enjoys contractual protection even if the social media followers are determined to not constitute trade secrets.
This case presents interesting legal questions such as whether or not social media followers deserve the same protection as a confidential customer list. Also, what is the independent economic value of each such follower? Are all social media followers equally valuable or is there differentiation?
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Erik Syverson Analyzes Internet Piracy Statutes for Fox News
Some members of Congress are considering new legislation that would provide increased protection for copyright holders in cases of internet piracy and infringement. I recently appeared on Fox News as an internet law attorney to discuss the benefits and burdens of the new copyright law proposal.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Smart Phone Privacy Issues
Recently I appeared on Fox News 11 in Los Angeles as a privacy lawyer to discuss issues related to smart phone apps. Smart phones are essentially mini computers and apps often contain viruses or collect and sell your personal information. Consumers need to understand the information that is collected, by whom and the purposes for which it is being sold.
Businesses looking to monetize the mobile market by selling apps or consumer data need to understand the consumer disclosures required and obligations to protect consumer data. The resale of consumer data may be a violaition of state and federal law in certain circumstances. Data breaches may also need to be promptly reported to consumers who have been compromised. Consent and notice are crucial aspects for conducting business in the mobile market.
Businesses looking to monetize the mobile market by selling apps or consumer data need to understand the consumer disclosures required and obligations to protect consumer data. The resale of consumer data may be a violaition of state and federal law in certain circumstances. Data breaches may also need to be promptly reported to consumers who have been compromised. Consent and notice are crucial aspects for conducting business in the mobile market.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Los Angeles Trademark Attorney Appears on Fox News
As a trademark infringement attorney, I am frequently asked to appear on national news outlets to discuss intellectual property issues. Today I appeared on Fox News to analyze efforts to obtain a trademark registration for the mark "Occupy Wall Street".
Monday, September 12, 2011
Law Enforcement and Social Media
Today I appeared on Fox News to discuss the use of social networks by law enforcement agencies. Such use invokes the First and Fourth Amendments in America, in addition to internet specific federal and state legislation. An experienced social media attorney can provide guidance on such issues.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Zynga v. Vostu
Social gaming litigation is heating up between Zynga and a Brazilian competitor Vostu. Zynga has become incredibly popular pursuant to games that it has developed for use on the Facebook platform. FarmVille is perhaps the best known.
Zynga alleges that Vostu has copied its popular games and offered carbon copies to internet users, most residing in Brazil. Vostu's defense thus far has been nothing more than that Zynga is a bad actor as well, having infringed numerous copyrights itself.
The most interesting aspects of this case appear to be procedural. That is because Zynga filed suit for copyright infringement in both the United States and Brazil. Vostu sought an injunction from the American court staying the Brazilian case while awaiting the outcome of the American case. That strategy may be because Vostu likely generates the bulk of its income in Brazil. Also, surprisingly, things aren't going too well for Vostu in its home ballpark of Brazil.
Initially, the American Court granted Vostu's request with a temporary restraining order. However, the Court reversed course and ruled recently that Zynga's Brazilian case may now go forward at the same time as the American case. Zynga's lawyers successfully argued that simultaneous litigation may proceed because copyrights are territorial in nature. Additionally, Zynga is not seeking duplicative monetary damages, different markets hence different monetary damages.
This case is interesting going forward because we are likely to see many more similar cases. Copyright infringement is one of the real dangers for new media content producers like Zynga. Many times, infringers feel emboldened by residency outside of the United States. Zynga's aggressive two track litigation approach may re-make the international copyright enforcement playbook. Two negatives of simultaneous copyright infringement actions may be inconsistent results and increased legal expense. Internet law firms will be watching this case closely.
Zynga alleges that Vostu has copied its popular games and offered carbon copies to internet users, most residing in Brazil. Vostu's defense thus far has been nothing more than that Zynga is a bad actor as well, having infringed numerous copyrights itself.
The most interesting aspects of this case appear to be procedural. That is because Zynga filed suit for copyright infringement in both the United States and Brazil. Vostu sought an injunction from the American court staying the Brazilian case while awaiting the outcome of the American case. That strategy may be because Vostu likely generates the bulk of its income in Brazil. Also, surprisingly, things aren't going too well for Vostu in its home ballpark of Brazil.
Initially, the American Court granted Vostu's request with a temporary restraining order. However, the Court reversed course and ruled recently that Zynga's Brazilian case may now go forward at the same time as the American case. Zynga's lawyers successfully argued that simultaneous litigation may proceed because copyrights are territorial in nature. Additionally, Zynga is not seeking duplicative monetary damages, different markets hence different monetary damages.
This case is interesting going forward because we are likely to see many more similar cases. Copyright infringement is one of the real dangers for new media content producers like Zynga. Many times, infringers feel emboldened by residency outside of the United States. Zynga's aggressive two track litigation approach may re-make the international copyright enforcement playbook. Two negatives of simultaneous copyright infringement actions may be inconsistent results and increased legal expense. Internet law firms will be watching this case closely.
Friday, July 1, 2011
New Domain Extensions Coming From ICANN
I recently discussed ICANN's new domain name expansion plans on Fox Live. The internet is running out of desirable domain name real estate. This will allow companies, athletes and entertainers to strengthen their brands. For example, rather than coke.com, the soft drink company may have drink.coke as a domain for a new marketing effort.
The price tag per domain is steep at around $200,000 for an application and annual fees of $25,000. Far different than the 1990's domain name gold rush where great domains could be picked up for $20 or so. That should keep out the bulk of cybersquatters, however, there will likely be fierce battles over generic domain extensions among large corporate interests. A new domain gold rush may likely emerge.
Plenty of trademark infringement lawsuits will certainly be filed. When such battles arise, it is important for trademark owners to retain an experienced domain name trademark lawyer to protect their intellectual property rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
