When it comes to social networks, there has
been a tendency for professionals to dismiss the more personal social platform
of Facebook, and dive straight into the more professional platform of LinkedIn.
A recent case, however, that keeping things
purely “professional” has inadvertently blurred the lines for businesses when
it comes to who owns the relationships and contact data cultivated on the
world’s number one social network for business professionals.
LinkedIn may have replaced the old fashioned
address book and database for keeping up with business contacts, but while many
companies encourage employees to use the online social networking site to keep
in touch with customers, few have realised the downside of such relationships
when an employee moves on.
Company-held data, such as a customer
database, clearly belongs to the company and can be easily protected against
misuse, however in the LinkedIn era the boundaries are increasingly unclear,
with many employees making personal contacts in the course of conducting their
professional business.
A recent case in the High Court tackled this
thorny issue, and employers now have a clear route to tackle any misuse of
contacts. “The LinkedIn Injunction”, as it is colloquially being referred to,
has made it clear that employers may be able to act to secure contacts
cultivated on behalf of the company in circumstances where they can show a
legitimate proprietary interest in an employee’s LinkedIn profile.
In those circumstances the company needs to
be able to show that the loss or misuse of an employee’s profile may give rise
to “irreparable harm that cannot be compensated” by any financial payment.
In the case of Whitmar Publications Limited v. Gamage and Others,
publishing company Whitmar was granted a restraining injunction against three
former employees who had set up in competition, alleging they did so whilst
still employed. Whitmar also alleged that contact information had been
collected from members of LinkedIn groups that were maintained by Whitmar.
The Court agreed that the LinkedIn groups
involved constituted legitimate company property as one of the employees
involved was responsible for maintaining these as part of their employment
duties and using Whitmar’s computers, with a clear aim of promoting Whitmar’s
business.
It also accepted that the former employees
had used contact information from the LinkedIn groups to send out promotional
material about their new company.
Granting the injunction to restrain the use
of Whitmar’s confidential information, the ex-employees were also required to
return confidential information and open up their computer systems for forensic
inspection.
So what action do you need to take? Here’s
our top five tips in how to ensure your social media policies are kept up to
date following this recent judgement:
- Assume that any LinkedIn account opened using an agreed company email address may subsequently belong to the company. LinkedIn accounts opened with a personal email will remain personal. Ensure this is clear to all employees.
- All content on the profile, such as photographs and individual profile descriptions of an employee’s current role, should be cleared by the company prior to publication.
- All job descriptions should clearly state that cultivating connections via LinkedIn is a part of business development for the company.
- Employment contracts and social media policies need to specify that any LinkedIn activity by an employee, being conducted using LinkedIn on the employer’s behalf contribute to a database of proprietary trade information.
- Employers need to be clear that compensation is being given for engaging in these business development activities as they take place during working hours.
And, finally, consider a more holistic
approach to your social media activity. In light of this judgement, perhaps
Twitter and Facebook have clearer personal and professional boundaries than
once thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment