How much is that tweep in the window?

Say you open a Twitter account in an effort to raise brand awareness for your employer. You frequently tweet about company news and special offers. Your Twitter handle even includes your employer’s name. Lots of people – heck, we’ll call it thousands – like what you have to say and click the “Follow” button.

Then one day another job opportunity comes along, and you take it. You bid adieu to coworkers, clean out your desk and make your next career move.

What happens to that Twitter account?

A similar scenario played out in late 2010 and has become the foundation for a federal lawsuit over social media account ownership.

For nearly four years, Noah Kravitz of Oakland, Calif., was the editor at Phonedog, a mobile phone news and reviews website. During that time, he amassed quite a following on his Twitter account, @Phonedog_Noah.  Kravitz left Phonedog amicably in October 2010 but continued to tweet periodically on behalf of the company. He kept the same Twitter account but changed the handle to @NoahKravitz.

But when Kravitz sued Phonedog last year over pay issues, he sparked what now has the potential to become a landmark social media case. Phonedog countersued Kravitz in July, claiming the 17,000 Twitter users following him as of October 2010 comprised the equivalent of a corporate “customer list” – and that list was the property of Phonedog. The company wants $340,000 in damages, or $2.50 for each follower over an eight-month period.

(Both parties have published their own versions of the story. You can read Kravitz’s account here and Phonedog’s version, which was just posted today, here.)

So who “owns” the Kravitz Twitter space? Are all of its followers – legit or spam – really worth two and a half bucks apiece? The court of public opinion so far appears to side with Kravitz on these issues. He may have created the account because of his employment with Phonedog, but supporters argue that it was Kravitz’s own content that made the account popular. Besides, let’s face it: Nobody really likes being “owned” or told how much they’re worth, let alone the tweeting masses.

Depending on how a federal court in northern California rules, though, this case could set major precedents for social media rights. Just think of how many Twitter users tweet on behalf of their employers, often to oodles of followers. Journalists, bloggers, even CEOs – the list of occupations is long. Should they be required to relinquish ownership of their Twitter accounts if they change jobs?

A point of contention in this particular case is whether Phonedog a social media policy in place, and if so, whether it addressed this issue of ownership. Human resources departments of companies large and small should make room for such a chapter in their employee handbooks, if they haven’t already.

Social media have become important promotional and communication vehicles for the business world, but this case exposes a huge gray area. What becomes of that gray area is a big deal, so stay tuned!