Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/PhoneDog_v._Kravitz> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 32 of
32
with 100 items per page.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz abstract "PhoneDog v. Kravitz, No. 11-03474 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011), was a case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California about whether Twitter accounts and their passwords could be company property or trade secrets. In this case a mobile device news website sued Kravitz, its former employee, after Kravitz refused to turn over password information for the Twitter account he developed and cultivated during his employment. 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 failure on behalf of the employee 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.".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageExternalLink scholar_case?case=16227806786911947872&q=phonedog+v+kravitz&hl=en&as_sdt=2006.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageExternalLink tweetvalue.com.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageExternalLink whatsmytwitteraccountworth.com.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageExternalLink 2011-11-08-Order%20re%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageExternalLink Phonedog-v-Kravitz-11-03474-N-D-Cal-Nov-8-2011.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageExternalLink noahkravitz.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageID "40913370".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wikiPageRevisionID "600630140".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz case "PhoneDog vs. Kravitz".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz court United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz dateDecided "2011-11-08".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz fullName "PHONEDOG, Plaintiff, v. NOAH KRAVITZ, Defendant.".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz holding "Twitter passwords and follower lists could constitute trade secrets.".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz judge "Maria-Elena James".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz keywords Social_media.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz keywords Tortious_interference.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz keywords Trade_secret.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz name "PhoneDog v. Kravitz".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz otherSource "Digital Media Law Project".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz otherSource "Google".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz otherSource "Scribd".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz otherUrl scholar_case?case=16227806786911947872&q=phonedog+v+kravitz&hl=en&as_sdt=2006.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz otherUrl 2011-11-08-Order%20re%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz otherUrl Phonedog-v-Kravitz-11-03474-N-D-Cal-Nov-8-2011.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz comment "PhoneDog v. Kravitz, No. 11-03474 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011), was a case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California about whether Twitter accounts and their passwords could be company property or trade secrets. In this case a mobile device news website sued Kravitz, its former employee, after Kravitz refused to turn over password information for the Twitter account he developed and cultivated during his employment.".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz label "PhoneDog v. Kravitz".
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz sameAs m.0yqmql4.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz sameAs Q17157186.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz sameAs Q17157186.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz wasDerivedFrom PhoneDog_v._Kravitz?oldid=600630140.
- PhoneDog_v._Kravitz isPrimaryTopicOf PhoneDog_v._Kravitz.