On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Liza Featherstone wrote:
> One thing I always wonder about the corporate personhood, is, wouldn't it be
> better to expand it in a totally literal-minded way. (I know, you would have
> to abolish limited liability - I don't know how to do that, of course.) Say,
> if they are going to be considered people and have the rights people have,
> they should have the responsibilities people have. Thus, say, OK
> corporations are people, so, when they commit crimes, the board, CEO and all
> of upper management have to do jail time. They cause someone's death, they
> get life sentences. Three strikes in California, we throw away the key. Etc.
> You could then criminalize environmental and labor law violations, and all
> sorts of other potentially great stuff. I think most people would rather see
> corporations gain responsibilities -- and miscreants wear leg irons -- than
> lose rights.
>
> Liza
Nice idea, but this requires a shift away from the corporation as an independent entity, distinct from any of the individuals who participate in it. If we hold the people in positions of power in the corporation responsible, then the corporation isn't a legal "person" with rights distinct from those of the people who are employed by the corporation. The cat's already out of the bag on this one, isn't it? (If you slander a corporation, you're not slandering an individual, even the CEO; if the corporation is fined for pollution, you're not directly fining any of the specific employees of the corporation.)
Miles