Talk:PhoneDog v. Kravitz

misplaced comments
(The following comment was accidentally placed within the article text; it was posted by user:Info2014bears.)


 * When Kravitz asked the court to dismiss this case, the court held that Twitter accounts and their passwords (as described by PhoneDog) could constitute trade secrets and that an employee failing to relinquish an account could constitute misuse of a trade secret or "trade secret misappropriation." This case is often cited in arguments for the importance of including clauses about social media account ownership in employment contracts. BL) PhoneDog seems like the Plaintiff, Kravitz the Defendant; can you make this more clear? Under what situation is an employee terminating a Twitter account (and is this a Twitter employee deleting a Twitter account, or a user deleting it once it their account is inactive? Why is PhoneDog suing?)

(just for the record)

New format?
Any thoughts on the format used here: http://tsi.brooklaw.edu/cases/%5Bfield_case_reference-title-raw%5D/reports/case-report-phonedog-v-kravitz Brooklaw Case Report Trade Secret Institute Retrieved November 7th 2013 Sashashekhar (talk)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of California, Berkeley supported by WikiProject Intellectual Property law and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2013 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 17:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)