The latest Case of the Week is the resolution of a case
I've covered previously. The case is Eagle v. Morgan (memorandum with findings of fact and
conclusions of law here) from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania federal
court, applying Pennsylvania state law.
You can read the Court's decision for a full rundown of the facts. The short
version: The employee opened a LinkedIn account following the employer's
guidelines, using the employer's email account, on the employer's computer, on
the employer's time, and the employer had her password. She was terminated, and
the employer took control of the account. She lost control of the account for a
few months and the employer changed the profile by changing some of the fields
to reflect information for the former-employee's replacement. However, the
account was technically still under the former-employee's name, had all of the
LinkedIn "Connections" of hers, and a search on her name would direct
users to her old account.
So, she filed a lawsuit essentially over ownership of the LinkedIn account.
Technically, she won. She established that the employer:
However, she lost on the tort of conversion because the
LinkedIn account is not a "tangible chattel" but an "intangible
right to access a specific page on a computer" (accordingly, it's not
clear if anybody really "owns" a LinkedIn account). The Court also noted
that Plaintiff would have established liability for tortious interference with
contract . . . if she had sufficiently proven actual damages.
Which brings us to Plaintiff's ultimate downfall. She
offered testimony that she had contracts with her LinkedIn connections and
argued that the Court should calculate damages as the average dollar amount of
contracts per LinkedIn connection, prorated for the months in which she lost
control of the account. She failed to really tie lost contracts to the LinkedIn
account though. The Court recognized that she established wrongdoing on the
part of the employer, but she failed to "establish with some reasonable
certainty the damages she sustained from that wrongdoing." So, she won $0.
I should note that Plaintiff was pro se (representing herself). I'm
actually impressed that she was able to establish liability for
"ownership" of her LinkedIn account, especially given the lack of
precedent. No doubt future litigants will bring expert witnesses and find a way
to more definitively establish damages.
My view on takeaways for employers? When employees leave - let them take their
individual social media accounts with them. Note that we are not talking about
an organization's social media accounts (like a company profile on LinkedIn,
employer's Facebook page, or Twitter account in the name of the employer). I
think those should stay with the employer. But there will probably be some gray
areas in between.
For more coverage, check out Sara Hutchins Jodka's Employer Law Report.
Read additional employment law articles on Phillip Miles'
blog, Lawffice Space
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.