Twitter is canablizing capitalizing on the tweets in its database - it's selling 2 years of archived tweets to UK-based Datasift to, well, sift through - according to mailonline (science & tech).  The company will use the information to help firms with marketing campaigns and target influential users. "Privacy advocates view this as an invasion of privacy, in that people generally consider tweets to be personal property.  But the deal makes clear they are not.  Our personal posts on social media are yet another way for advertisements to be better targeted and that’s a very lucrative industry," Nick Pickles, director of the U.K.'s Big Brother Watch Campaign Group. He adds: "It’s clear that if you’re not paying for a service, you are not the customer - you’re the product." Just think: Twitter has archived every tweet - some 250 million a day - and Datasift will have access to all those posted since January 2010.  The licensing deal is part of Twitter’s plan to generate revenue from its service, which is free to its estimated 300 million users worldwide. Turning Tweets Into State Evidence Against Respondents or Defendants. Online WSJ wrote about Manhattan prosecutors' plans to subpoena the Twitter accounts of people who were arrested last October during an Occupy Wall Street march on the Brooklyn Bridge.  Jeff Rae was arrested, along with hundreds of others, on some low level charges, like disorderly conduct.  Yet, he decided to fight the charges, believing he had been entrapped. Well, on Monday, Mr. Rae changed his mind and accepted a plea agreement with Manhattan prosecutors.  Why?  The D.A.'s office had subpoenaed his Twitter account, raising the stakes in what he had thought would be a speedy case he could win.  "You're fighting the king," said the 31-year-old Washington resident, who had written "I will tweet until I'm cuffed ;)" on Twitter during the October march. In these short Twitter messages, protesters coordinate activities and warn others of law-enforcement efforts.  In doing so, prosecutors believe some have revealed an intent to break the law. Lesson from Professor Orin Kerr, George Washington University. "The lesson is, if you're speaking publicly and leaving a record as to who you are, that's information the government can legally access."  Prof. Kerr specializes in electronic evidence and Internet law. Tweets could address a key problem for prosecutors as the cases move through court: establishing the actions and intentions of specific people who were arrested in huge groups. Out of 1,936 OWS protest-related cases that have come through the court system, according to the DA's office, more than 850 defendants have pleaded guilty in exchange for having the charge expunged after 6 months of staying out of trouble.  But 257 cases have been dismissed for lack of evidence.  Defense attorneys said subpoenas have been issued for at least 4 protesters' Twitter accounts. In the prosecution of another protester arrested on the Brookly Bridge - Malcolm Harris - Assistant D.A. Lee Langston outlined why a tweet would be helpful.  Mr. Langston wrote in a court filing that Mr. Harris tweets "made clear…that he was well aware of the police instructions that day, and acted with the intent of obstructing traffic on the bridge." Attempt to Fight Back. An attorney for protester Harris is trying to stop Twitter from releasing the information.  A motion to quash the subpoena will be heard in court on Friday.  For one thing, the protesters and their lawyers liken the use of subpoenas in these cases to using "a sledgehammer to squash a gnat." Twitter declined to comment on the cases. A spokesman pointed to the company's published policy, which says it doesn't release users' private information "except as lawfully required by appropriate legal process such as subpoena, court order, or other valid legal process." The policy says Twitter informs users of law enforcement requests for information.

[C-I Take Away: Employees on Wall Street, as in other industries, have learned the hard way that regulators and people in enforcement will use retained records of conversations and communications as needed, and wherever available. 

Your Next Steps? Compliance and Legal staffs should immediately determine whether its personnel communicate on twitter and other social media and, if so, to what extent.  Firm policies and procedures re: the use of online social media services, if not already on the books, should immediately be drafted and implemented.  Revise it as you go along with reviews.  Training programs should be held with affected personnel - registered and unregistered alike.

If it is ascertained that such communications includes any reference to business, the next step is to obtain copies of these missives - any way possible.  Otherwise, "right off the bat," a firm is in violation of books and records rules.

Lastly, establish WSPs - supervisory controls - to ensure that regular and comprehensive checks are made of the communications.  Initial scopes should be comparable to those for other types of communications with the public.]

For further details on the above cases, go to:  [WSJ, 3/20/12].