Facts not in evidence -- or rather not in this silly article
Did Noah create the twitter account at the direction of his employer?
Was opertaing the twitter account part of his duties at the company?
If so, then the account is a "work for hire" and it belongs to the company just as anything else an employee creates as part of his or her job.
If it was his own idea without company involvement and he operated the account entirely on his own time, then it is his property.
If the twitter account was his own idea and the company merely allowed him on-the-job time to operate the account, then the situation is a lot fuzzier. Trademark infringement is almost always complicated, especially for things like domain names, etc. In general, a company does not have an absolute right to its name in all instances, but does have a right to its name and other trademarks and brand names in any situation where a reasonable person would think that the usage was associated with the company.
For example a Ford dealer named Smith would not have a right to block someone creating a domain name of Smith_Ford_Dealer_Ripped_Me_Off.com because no one would think that was his company's website. But courts would generally side with the company against someone creating a website Smith_Ford_Dealership.com
