Allegedly $US20!
This was the value of the loss claimed per Twitter follower in a claim brought before the United States District Court in the Northern District of California against Noah Kravitz (Kravitz) by his former employer, Phonedog.com (Phonedog).
The dispute allegedly arose in October 2010 after Kratvitz resigned from his job at the mobile phone site www.phonedog.com. While Kravitz was employed by Phonedog, it is alleged that he created a Twitter account under the name of Phonedog_Noah. After nearly four years, he built over 17,000 followers. The New York Times reported that when Kravitz left Phonedog they told him that he could keep his Twitter account as long as he would still occasionally Tweet for them. At the time, Kravitz agreed as they were both parting on friendly terms.
Kravitz then subsequently changed his Twitter handle to NoahKravitz and eight months later, Phonedog sued him claiming that the Twitter followers were a customer list. As a result, Phonedog sought damages of $2.50 per month per follower for eight (8) months, for a total of $340,000 – or $US20 per follower.
If proven, this case may set future precedent in relation to the monetary value of a Twitter follower. The further question remains as to the value of a professional connection on LinkedIn?
Express clauses in employment contracts
In recent months, Dundas Lawyers has been asked by various clients to include express provisions relating to social media accounts in their employment contracts. Many of these have also dealt with how LinkedIn connections must be dealt with by employers after the employee leaves.
In today’s IT centric world, social media has become an invaluable marketing tool for many companies. Therefore it’s becoming more common for Australian companies to have social media clauses in their employment contracts. If you would like Dundas Lawyers to help you review your current employment contracts, please feel free to contact us.
Further information
Dundas Lawyers assists with social media law. To ascertain how Dundas Lawyers can assist you, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Disclaimer
This article contains general commentary only. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
Related insights about social media law
-
Australian Government announces a digital duty of care
The Australian Government has announced that it will soon be introducing legislation to create a digital duty of care under the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth) (Act) in response to findings from an independent Statutory Review of the Online Safety Act 2021 (Review). The Honourable Anika Wells MP announced that “big tech” companies will soon…
-
OAIC publishes new guidance for under-16s social media ban
On 10 October 2025, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), led by Privacy Commissioner, Ms Carly Kind, released a twenty-nine (29) page Privacy Guidance on Part 4A (Social Media Minimum Age) of the Online Safety Act 2021 (New Guidance). This New Guidance details the privacy obligations for Age-Restricted Social Media Platforms (Restricted Platforms)…
-
The new Social Media (Anti-Trolling) Bill 2021
The Australian Government has introduced a Social Media (Anti-Trolling) Bill 2021 to protect Australians who use social media. Find out what measures are included in the bill and how it could help protect you from online trolls.
-
Can social media chat logs be documents in Federal Court?
The Federal Court has addressed the hearsay rule exception of using a log from an instant messaging platform to prove the identity of the sender, date, time of the message, and contents of the statement.
