IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/lawarc/gndxz.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Original Instagram – Whose Property is it?

Author

Listed:
  • Altmeyer, Susan

Abstract

When a worker creates a personal social media account and then uses it to promote their employer, courts differ as to whether subsequent use for the employer can operate as an implied transfer of the account to the employer when the employment relationship ends. Allowing an implied transfer flies in the face of traditional contract and property law principles, and results in workers unknowingly giving up their right to a valuable asset they created. The better rule in determining ownership of a social media account is to first determine who owned the account at the time of original creation, and then determine whether a transfer occurred via a valid, express contract. This rule was recently adopted for the first time in JLM Couture, Inc. v. Gutman, 91 F.4th 91, 104 (2d Cir. 2024). This paper examines why this “Original Creation and Control” test is the better approach. The Original Creation and Control test promotes judicial economy, clarity and predictability. It also has the advantages of a property rule, namely encouraging investment, reducing litigation, and allowing employee mobility. This test achieves the proper balance between worker and employer rights and yields fair results in test cases. Additionally, a uniform law should be created based on the Original Creation and Control test to help promote uniformity across jurisdictions.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:osf:lawarc:gndxz
DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/gndxz
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://osf.io/download/673ca73d06d08d7244886725/
Download Restriction: no

File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/gndxz?utm_source=ideas
LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
---><---

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:lawarc:gndxz. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://lawarchive.info/ .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.