• Juridicial person

    From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to All on Saturday, June 08, 2019 17:21:40
    I'm presently writing an essay regarding the crazy intellectual property status
    that we have, almost all over the world since about half a century ago.

    I've nailed it all down to the US 14th amendment, where the US wanted to grant equal rights to the slaves, but where soon some clever corporate lawyers took the opportunity to claim that corporations should have the same rights, claiming that a US corporation is also a US citizen.

    As a side note, only 5% of all the US Supreme Court cases handled for the next 50 years after and about the 14th amendment was adopted were about former slaves. The rest were about corporate attempts to be treated as equal citizens.
    I ended up with the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. case:

    http://tinyurl.com/omkm9t3

    What I haven't managed to figure out yet is how this USSC ruling could actually mean that suddenly a corporation can be regarded as an actual citizen?

    If they are not, the intellectual property laws of today, in the entire world, would be totally easy to make in par with reality. If every single "intellectual property" was to be maintained by the creator, he/she could never
    sell out and he/she would be granted every right to his creation. He could never sell out to either patent trolls nor the greedy media industry. Right?

    Also, the bankers and other financial crooks wouldn't get away with what they now are enjoying in their safe retirement on the tax payers bill.

    So who does actually benefit from this slave to corporations sell-out of the
    US 14th amendment, according to the USSC?

    Well, if you have some information that you yourself has found out, please drop me a netmail or an email (see the first page of the latest Fidonews), it would be very much appreciated.



    ..

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Björn Felten on Sunday, June 09, 2019 04:22:34
    Hello Bjrn,

    I'm presently writing an essay regarding the crazy intellectual property status that we have, almost all over the world since about half a century ago.

    It goes further back than that. Much further.

    I've nailed it all down to the US 14th amendment, where the US wanted to grant equal rights to the slaves,

    Slaves were not people. The 13th amendment did away with slavery
    and indentured servitude, except as punishment for crimes of those
    duly convicted. The 14th amendment granted citizenship to those
    who had been slaves of the state where they reside. The 15th
    amendment granted former slaves the right to vote, regardless of
    race or color. Women still had to wait, regardless of color.

    but where soon some clever corporate lawyers took the opportunity to claim that corporations should have the same rights, claiming that a US corporation is also a US citizen.

    No, no, no, no, no! You've got it all wrong! Not citizens under
    the Comity Clause {"the Citizens of each State shal be entitled to
    all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several states."
    Article IV}.

    Alexander Hamilton wrote about it in Federalist No. 80, arguing
    that the Comity Clause was "the basis of the union."

    As a side note, only 5% of all the US Supreme Court cases handled for the next 50 years after and about the 14th amendment was adopted were about former slaves. The rest were about corporate attempts to be treated as equal citizens. I ended up with the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. case:

    http://tinyurl.com/omkm9t3


    US Senator Roscoe Conkling's argument that the 14th amendment was not
    limited to natural persons. The USSC did not decide the matter of the
    actual opinion, as it only appeared in a footnote (1886).

    The terms "citizen" and "person" were used differently. The drafters
    chose "person" specifically to include corporations.

    What I haven't managed to figure out yet is how this USSC ruling could actually mean that suddenly a corporation can be regarded as an actual citizen?

    Under the Comity Clause the USSC has never extended corporate
    "citizenship." Bank of Augusta, Earle, 38 U.S. 519, 587 (1839)

    "The only rights [a corporation] can claim are the rights which are
    given to it in that character, and not the rights which belong to its
    members as citzens of a state."

    If they are not, the intellectual property laws of today, in the entire world, would be totally easy to make in par with reality.

    "Corporations do not make up this country. People do." ~Gerry Spence

    If every single "intellectual property" was to be maintained by the
    creator,
    he/she could never sell out and he/she would be granted every right to his creation. He could never sell out to either patent trolls nor the greedy media industry. Right?

    We are only endowed by certain inalienable rights, among them life,
    liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (according to Thomas Jefferson).
    Does that include intellectual property?

    Also, the bankers and other financial crooks wouldn't get away with what they now are enjoying in their safe retirement on the tax payers bill.

    The law is not there to protect the people. The law is there to
    protect those in power to maintain themselves being in power. That
    is how the system works.

    So who does actually benefit from this slave to corporations sell-out of
    the
    US 14th amendment, according to the USSC?

    The USSC has never opined that corporations are citizens.
    Even in the USSC case cited, it should be noted that
    US Senator Roscoe Conkling lied in his definition in order
    to make it appear he had a meritorious case.

    Well, if you have some information that you yourself has found out, please drop me a netmail or an email (see the first page of the latest Fidonews), it would be very much appreciated.

    What is a citizen? What is a person?
    What is a naturally born citizen? What is a natural person?

    Who decides who, or what, is a citizen or a person?

    The Framers of the Constitution wrote their own rules, for
    themselves and for those who supported them. Certainly not
    for those who held contrary views, or other interests.

    White men who owned property had rights in the early days.
    Or so was their claim. Then came others who also staked their
    own claim. What about the future, such as when AI becomes
    sembient? Robots are reality, not science fiction. And
    also have their own language, developing into something only
    robots can understand.

    What if robots decide they are persons? Or citizens? Who are
    we to stop them? Even if we wanted to, I am not sure we would be
    able to.

    Self-replicating robots. With their own language, developed
    by robots, for robots. We wouldn't have a chance.

    Isaac Asimov wrote the three laws of robots.
    But that was fiction, intended for storytelling.

    What laws will robots write for themselves?
    Certainly not laws we the people write for them.

    George Orwell wrote a book called "1984" in 1949.
    Some of things he wrote about have come true.
    One of those things was the Versificator, an AI
    that composed music and wrote literature.

    We have that today, and have no more real need
    to depend on other humans to compose music and/or
    write books. With that in mind, we no longer
    have the need for other humans to write laws or
    anything else.

    With AI in charge of INGSOC, Winston Smith knew
    that all was well. Especially with posters of some
    dark mustachio'd guy being posted everywhere, with
    the caption "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU" staring
    right at him.

    Of course, Winston realizes all too late that
    BIG BROTHER is just a fictional figure invented
    by the party to muster loyalty.

    If only the world knew then that robots are real.

    --Lee

    --
    Nobody Beats Our Meat

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Sunday, June 09, 2019 14:30:34
    On 9/06/2019 12:22, 2:203/2 wrote:

    We are only endowed by certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (according to Thomas Jefferson).

    inalienable
    /ɪnˈeɪlɪənəb(ə)l/
    adjective
    not subject to being taken away from or given away by the possessor.

    Does that include intellectual property?

    It would appear that Tom was wrong on at least two of those three "inalienable"
    rights today.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From BOB ACKLEY@1:123/140 to BJƒRN FELTEN on Monday, June 10, 2019 14:47:56
    I'm presently writing an essay regarding the crazy intellectual
    property status
    that we have, almost all over the world since about half a century
    ago.

    I've nailed it all down to the US 14th amendment, where the US
    wanted to
    grant equal rights to the slaves, but where soon some clever
    corporate lawyers
    took the opportunity to claim that corporations should have the same
    rights,
    claiming that a US corporation is also a US citizen.

    Way back in business classes I was taught that a corporation is
    an "artificial person." I don't think that corporations can claim to
    be "citizens," for instance, they can't vote. But they CAN own
    property, including intellectual property (i.e. patents, copyrights,
    etc.). IMO US copyright laws need to be completely overhauled.
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)
  • From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to BOB ACKLEY on Monday, June 10, 2019 21:15:20
    But they CAN own
    property, including intellectual property (i.e. patents, copyrights, etc.). IMO US copyright laws need to be completely overhauled.

    Not only the US ditto, but that of the entire, US controlled, WIPO world.

    If I invent something, I can get a patent and then my invention is protected
    for 20 years. It'll cost me millions upon millions if I want a world wide patent. Been there, tried that, but gave up for lack of funds, so my two patents never made it outside of Sweden.

    If I record something I sing in the shower, I get protection (automatically,
    internationally, free of charge) for my entire lifetime plus 70 years -- WIPO pushing for 90.

    Seriously?



    ..

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)