THW abolish corporate personhood

Audrina:
Lydia:

Actions of company are for the interests of top tier Stance: WOn‘T fully distinguish individuals from
people (few people)
company, but person still has autonomy

Even if you are connected to company, you have

In their world: Everyone, including laborers will have two legal identities: as part of company or yourself

a share of the company. Because everybody needs

everybody
Why is the connection important?

For liability

Ownership thru private contracts

We want there to be choices of who can be sued

Individual persons do human rights violations not as

Company decisionmaking will be much fairer
part of company

Everyone will have a say from all ranks of the Protecting companies without bringing down the
company
other private entities

Unfair because companies make effort to prevent

POI: sometimes decisions are very time sensitive;
these things: eg hiring good people, supervision,

How would you discuss everyone?

So they’ve done their part

We can’t harm private entities that are connected to

We wanted a representative, not just CEOs and them

investors

We can sue systematic things being done by

It’s okay to take longer time because decisions company

cannot be taken back

In gov you have to make sure that everyone is liable
in order to take down the company

POI: since you don’t have the burden of the in SQ companies are the ones who benefit from
company being sued but only the top executives these problems,

why would you consult everyone?

Because everyone is affected

POI: If the boss of Brothers caused the fuckup how
come the entirety of banking system has to pay

We’re only going to hold the person who fucks up

responsible
Bc the banking system allowed them to get away
with it

POI: On our side you have the option to sue

individual people if it is a consenting individual Protection for subordinates

option, but you can sue the company if the fault is They don’t always do what they want, they do
systemic?
things in the interest of their companies

People in private contracts don’t have the option to

Decisions are made by top management in status opt out, so they shouldn’t be held liable

quo

75
We’re not going to affect people and hold them
responsible

74

Santo
Kindi

Sometimes individuals are responsible so we Corporate personhood is an option that must exist

should not burden the entire company

To a certain exist, the decisions you made are

We don’t want the notion that everyone is guilty, but influenced by that company and we have to analyze
ot be able to pinpoint who’s responsible and ok to how much company is at fault

take down everyone complicit

Company culture contributes to people’s actions

Time-sensitivity: subjective

For a laborer it’s time sensitive to have wages They want if company does shitty things, you
heightened
imprison the bosses

For CEO not because better profits for corp is time-

sensitive
Ex Rana Plaza, do people in BOD or other parts of
We have systems to make decisions quickly (for company or investors have influence

time sensitive issues)

We provide platform for laborers

Influence where? Eg HM wants fast profits, want
cheap labor.

On prosecuting individuals

We should opt for pros indiv:

Under gov world, we don’t examine the company
Opp logic: some crimes are structural, so entirety of pressures at all

company has to be held responsible

Even if these abuses profit the company, it doesn’t Person’s decision cannot escape from the company
trickle down to workers
culture

They want laborers to hold the same responsibility

as company to the extent that people who aren’t If your bad decision is totally your fault it’s okay for
responsible can be held responsible
you to go to jail

Where the company culture is systematic, we need

The entire company will not... go to jail to have this kind of option

Punishment: jail directly for board of director

You can’t opt out because there’s a lot of pressure

It’s not your fault to engage in things

In our side, it’s easier to prosecute boss

In SQ, if workers want to prosecute boss, it will be These investors pushed you to make these
framed as action against corporation, so boss can decisions

use company assets to go against laborer

POI: if i’m a social outcast, and that makes me a

On our side the boss’s resources will not be as social killer, is that the neighbors’ fault?

huge as a corporations’s resources

NO! How you push CEOs: i’m not going to invest,

77
or i’m going to take away your money, and you
have no choice but to obey

Options on Gov: 1. Go bankrupt 2. Go to jail

Not everyone will go to jail

How do you punish companies?

Examine key decision makers

DISCUSS HOW CORP PERSONHOOD WORKS

76.5
VM
Salsa

VERY CONFUSING I AGREE

Clarification: Lydia’s point sounds like GOV
because we haven’t discussed how we will identify
Clarification of Aud’s fairness in corporate the identity of a company when this concept is
decisionmaking
gone

On our side inevitable for ppl to not becaome guilty

Very top-down, often decided by owner and CEO
by association

Against desire of worker, laborers are so poor

they’re gonna die
Mostly how bad higher ups are big in that company

Shoplisting tai tai an top mgmt

Important Q: how we punish people

Distinguish corporation: own property like assets, People who are going to be mostly harmed are not
factory, patents, copyright, products
people who sit on the lower end. The moment
company is charged, it’s not the min wage workers
What’s different? Things are more ambiguous. Who who are harmed the most

owns the code? Is it the investor, the engineer, the But those who hold SHARES bc of profitability

CEO?

Everyone is involved in the creation of thing

You can’t do their thing bc everyone would go to jail
because everyone on BOD will be held complicit

The problem is oversimplification. Problem: the

assets can be used by investors, while laborers On our side, the public can judge whether or not
can’t have
company can be held liable

(No agency) Much worse pointing fingers on their

When the corporate is not considered a legal entity, side on their side

everything something is disagreed on, the worker

can simply say they would take back the CODE
Moral comfort—you don’t want to do things, but
with the existence of corporate personhood, you
As a result patents, products, copyrights
can still have moral comfort

Decisions get fairer

They don’t have a say

POI: If you have a lot of shares, the engineers will

have a say
POI: 2008

It will be slower
Tool for suing individuals exists on both sides

It’s okay, companies are now moving too fast. Now Punitive:

we have legal checks and balances eg in Greece

It’s important to be able to punish corporations

(Also germany?) WE want to make a change that is top down

So we cann attack corporation bc this will affect

Everyone consents to a project and the result is their shares and value

good
Forcing company to re-evaluate

Corporate liability
This will happen because when corporate
personhood exists people care about what other
We care that company doesn’t exist as a person. If people do

these people are the main contributor they will be

the ones who will be punished
If not, people will be unaffected by abuses other
people do bc they think those people will be the
Much easier for people to escape in SQ
ones who will change things

Company can exist in many areas so investors and

CEOs can escape punishment because they can People only want to fight when they think their
point fingers and escape accountability
identities are in danger

Because even when you want to prosecute they say

their decision is a decision of a corporation, and
company can run away from punishment

Character of opp is unfair: they have to engage with

cases where oil rig is closed entirely without caring
about laborers who work there (79)