A while ago, I registered a few extra Twitter account usernames with the hopes of someday using them. These usernames are either variations of my own name, or catchy word combinations that I feel make great attention-grabbing Twitter usernames. Perhaps I'll use them for a creative endeavor down the road. Some of them I've already started using.

Since I haven't found a use yet for most of my inactive Twitter accounts, they are sitting dormant - IE: no updates, and no profile image.

Well, according to Twitter, you can't do this:

Mass account creation is a spam violation and is against the Twitter Rules. Accounts created in a serial fashion will be suspended, and user names will no longer be available.

More specifically, the following factors may be perceived as "name squatting" by Twitter:

• the number of accounts created
• creating accounts for the purpose of preventing others from using those account names
• creating accounts for the purpose of selling those accounts
• using feeds of third-party content to update and maintain accounts under the names of those third parties

In my case, I am creating accounts that I feel I will use some day for a creative endeavor. Does this constitute name squatting?

My intentions are not malicious - I am registering Twitter usernames that I do intend to use - I'm just not using them yet.

Twitter goes on to further say:

Accounts that are inactive for more than 6 months may be removed without further notice.

Perhaps I could provide minimal updates along with a profile image to ensure my accounts remain out of Twitter's spam filters.

But my question remains... If I am name squatting for creative endeavors, and do not have malicious intent, is this against the rules?

Argument for name squatting

One side of me says: "There's no way I'm in the wrong." If I came up with the creative Twitter username, I should be able to "own" it - at least for a period of time. I compare it to coming up with a creative domain name. If I register a domain name, and leave the site empty (for now), is that considered "domain squatting?" Sure, but it's not illegal unless you have malicious intent - IE: you plan to turn around and sell it for an inflated price.

The way I see it - if I think of it, I should be able to own it. I came up with the catchy word combination or pattern. So isn't that considered my "intellectual property?"

(Of course, you have to pay for domain registration, but you catch my drift.)

Argument against name squatting

Another side of my thinks I am in the wrong, simply because I am blocking other people from registering my inactive accounts. Since I have no valid use for these accounts yet, someone looking to use one of my inactive accounts could truthfully have an argument against me.

Of course, I could always say, "Oh, but I do have a valid use... It'll just be a short while now before I make it public... Any day now!" I could claim I'm still considering the best use for the account, even though I may not have any idea of what to do with it.

So as you can see, the line is kind of blurred on what constitutes a valid account.

Being confronted

I was recently confronted by someone who wanted one of my "reserved" Twitter accounts. They asked nicely and respectfully, rather than accusing me of name squatting, and reporting me to Twitter. They basically said:

"Hey, I noticed you're not using this account. Would you be willing to release it so I can register for it?"

I politely replied "no," because I believe my arguments for name squatting (for creative purposes) are valid. Since I will be using it for a creative purpose, and not malicious or for sale - I see no harm in hanging onto it for a while. Until Twitter starts cracking down on registering extra accounts for creative purposes, or better clarifies their help post on this scenario, I will continue to do it.