1. Content
  2. Index
  3. Search
  4. RSS/Subscribe

ACACIA · Monday August 13, 2007 by Crosbie Fitch

A Corporation And Citizen Isolation Amendment

  1. Corporation may not sue citizen
  2. Citizen may not sue corporation

Inspiration

Acacia flower with thorns
The precious flower of the individual needs thorns to protect it against corporate grip.

Moreover

  • If a citizen wishes to sue a corporation they can incorporate themselves to do so.
  • If a corporation wishes to sue a citizen it can encourage, finance and capitalise the incorporation of the citizen – but, only if the citizen wishes (to have themselves represented by a congruent corporation).
  • Corporations may not otherwise sponsor citizens.
  • Citizens may not be incorporated against their will
  • A citizen may not represent a corporation.
  • A corporation may not represent a citizen unless it is specially created to do so.
  • The term ‘affiliation of citizens’ may also be substituted in the above for ‘citizen’.

Purpose

ACACIA is a proposal for a constitutional amendment, but can be used as a principle in the interim by those who support it and wish to adhere to it on a conscientious basis.

Motivation

  • To prevent citizens sufffering unethical litigation for enjoying their cultural freedom by sharing and building upon published works.
  • To at least revert copyright and patent back to their more appropriate status as commercial privileges and monopolies to be enjoyed by corporations against other corporations – not against citizens.
  • To provide a simple protocol that can be followed without subjective analysis to improve constitutional protection of civil liberties.
  • To rectify the recognition of corporations as distinct entities from human beings, with analogous and alternative privileges to the human rights of citizens, rather than the same rights.
  • To help guard against the law being exploited by corporations to subjugate the citizenry.
  • To ensure litigation only occurs between entities of equal natures, that constraints and penalties intended for corporations are not levied against citizens, and vice versa.

Application

If you are a lawyer do not take on any cases between corporations and citizens.

By all means encourage citizens to become incorporated.

Darryl Moore said 4115 days ago :

OMG, this is an awful idea. I totally agree that copyright should solely be concerned with commercial uses, but there are so many ways that this simply will not work.

What you you do when your contractor, who is incorporated, messes up the reno to your house if you can’t sue? What about unlawful termination from an employer. What about when a former employee takes the company client list with him. This list goes on.

Even with copyright. What about the bootlegger at the corner selling pirated DVDs. What about the company that takes your CC licenced didi you wrote and puts it into a commercial movie.

Crosbie Fitch said 4115 days ago :

Either you select a business relationship with a human contractor, or incorporate yourself and have a business relationship with a corporation.

In other words, humans can contract with each other, or corporations can contract with each other, but no contract between mortal being and immortal corporation should be tenable.

If an employer breaks employment law then presumably no employee needs to sue them?

As for an employee taking a client list, I see nothing unethical in such an action. The employee’s reputation may well be affected of course.

As for bootleggers, as long as they are not committing plagiarism, violating anyone’s privacy, or misrepresenting unauthorised copies as genuine, then I don’t see anything wrong with selling pirated DVDs. However, if there remains any human being who still owns a copyright on the DVD that is infringed, then they could sue the bootlegger for infringement (if they rejected the bootlegger’s natural right to cultural liberty). Similarly, a corporate owner of copyrights on the DVD could persuade the bootlegger to become incorporated such that they may be sued, which the bootlegger might agree to if they felt the potential rewards/risks sufficiently attractive.

As for corporate infringement of an individual’s copyright (whether commercial use of CC-NC or anything else), well, the individual may incorporate themselves to engage in litigation if they wished (or sell their copyright to another corporation who may be attracted by the potential damages). It’s moot anyway, as members of the public can have no rational interest in constraining the use or reproduction of their published works – such control is desired only by publishing corporations in protection of their unethical monopolies.



 

About

Contact

Recent Articles

Recent Comments

Topics

Rights

Natural Right

Legal Rights

Life

Equality

Fraternity

Violence

Privacy

Being Privy

Confidentiality

Personal Data

Publication

Truth

Attribution

Authenticity

Moral Rights

Plagiarism

Representation

Veracity

Liberty

Censorship

Disclosure

Freedom of Speech

Freedom vs Liberty

Official Secrets Act

Piracy

Property

Apprehensibility

Facility

Identifiability

Copyright

Copyfarleft

Ineffectiveness

Modulation

Neutralisation

Patent

Software

US Constitution

'exclusive right'

Sanction

Contract

Inalienability

Licensing

NDA

Abolition

GPL

Business

Models

Incorporation

Immortality

No Rights

Regulation

Culture

Miscellany

Links

Principles

Amnesty International

Copyleft (Wikipedia)

Electronic Frontier

Free Culture F'n

Free Culture UK

Free S/w Foundation

Pontification

Against Monopoly

One Small Voice

Open...

P2Pnet

Question Copyright

Paragons

GratisVibes

Jamendo

SourceForge

Wikipedia

Protagonists

Downhill Battle

Publishers vs Public

Proof

Rethinking Copyright

Papers

Against Monopoly

Ecstasy of Influence

Libertarian Case

Post-Copyright

Practitioners

Janet Hawtin

Nina Paley

Rob Myers

Scott Carpenter