# Question about corporate person-hood **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 26, 2011, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171 "2011-11-26T18:51:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/81 "2011-11-30T19:25:26Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > No - I am saying that when tomndebb puts his mod hat on, he is speaking for the corporation for the purpose of enforcing board rules. He may personally object to this action, but that isn’t generally an issue because he isn’t doing it personally, he is acting on behalf of rules set up by the corporation. > > At all times he has personal rights of expression - he has a responsibility to assist a corporation in its mission in this regard because of a responsibility undertaken on behalf of the board. None of this diminishes or increases his freedom in any way, it is just an added responsibility. Most of us have these from time to time because of positions we hold in companies, organizations, churches, and the like. > > I really don’t know why this is such a mystery to you. My point is that tomndebb’s rights as a private individual are identical to his rights as a corporate representative. He doesn’t acquire any new rights when he puts his corporate representative hat on. He’s just using the rights he always has for a different purpose. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/82 "2011-11-30T19:26:18Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Can you give an example of speech that doesn’t originate from a person? I did in several posts above. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/83 "2011-11-30T19:38:36Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > I did in several posts above. When the ACLU files a suit over suppressing the book, would it be Das Kapital vs USA? I suspect not, I think it would be [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com) vs USA, or Library vs USA, or Book Owners vs USA. Specifically, a collection of human beings with standing to challenge the new law. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/84 "2011-11-30T19:48:22Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > When the ACLU files a suit over suppressing the book, would it be Das Kapital vs USA? I suspect not, I think it would be [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com) vs USA, or Library vs USA, or Book Owners vs USA. Specifically, a collection of human beings with standing to challenge the new law. Yes, but they are not the originators of the speech being suppressed. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/85 "2011-11-30T20:12:50Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Yes, but they are not the originators of the speech being suppressed. So? Speech doesn’t have to be original to be protected. If I wanted to own a copy of Das Kapital, and the government raided my home to take it away, I sure as hell would think that my rights were violated, not the rights of some sheets of paper. The book doesn’t have any right to exist, but I have the right to own it, read it, re-print it, or read from it out loud on a street corner, if I want. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/86 "2011-11-30T20:30:20Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > So? So it is not their “freedom of speech” that is being violated. > [@](#): > > Speech doesn’t have to be original to be protected. If I wanted to own a copy of Das Kapital, and the government raided my home to take it away, I sure as hell would think that my rights were violated, not the rights of some sheets of paper. Your “rights” would be but not your “freedom of speech”. The “freedom of speech” applies to the book, not to you. ---
**Author:** ![merrick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/58956e/32.png) [@merrick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/merrick)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/87 "2011-11-30T20:31:59Z")
There seems to be a misunderstanding here. > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But let’s assume for a moment that we’re discussing some form of speech which is recognized as being subject to legal regulation. If an individual is subject to a regulation than that individual shouldn’t be able to do a legal flanking manuever by having a corporation “speak” for him. Cheesesteak Corp shouldn’t be able to shout “fire” in a crowded theatre or do anything else that Cheesesteak can’t legally do. Who in this thread is claiming anything different? The argument is whether the government can restrict speech _solely_ on the grounds that it originates from (or is published by) a corporation, rather than an individual. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/88 "2011-11-30T20:44:08Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > My point is that tomndebb’s rights as a private individual are identical to his rights as a corporate representative. He doesn’t acquire any new rights when he puts his corporate representative hat on. He’s just using the rights he always has for a different purpose. But doesn’t the corporation have First Amendment rights apart from the individual people that are employed by the corporation? That seems to be the inevitable conclusion of the existing case law. Notice that the appellant was not the Times publisher nor any Times editor - it was the Times Corporation. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/89 "2011-11-30T20:51:02Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Can you give an example of speech that doesn’t originate from a person? Like I said above - the Declaration of Independence was written by a committee, and as such reads differently than it would had it been written by a single person. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/90 "2011-11-30T21:18:19Z")
Also - there is the question of the unsigned editorial in a newspaper. Isn’t this best understood as a corporate work? ---
**Author:** ![Aqua\_regis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d78d45/32.png) [@Aqua\_regis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aqua_regis)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2011, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/91 "2011-12-01T00:27:19Z")
**Terr** , maybe I misunderstand your position, but wouldn’t the protection of disembodied speech be pointless, since such an entity could not enter a lawsuit and so the first amendment be effectively unenforceable in court? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2011, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/92 "2011-12-01T00:41:29Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Like I said above - the Declaration of Independence was written by a committee, and as such reads differently than it would had it been written by a single person. A committee consisting of what? Were there members of this committee that were horses or chickens or dolphins? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2011, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/93 "2011-12-01T00:54:57Z")
> [@Aqua\_regis](#): > > **Terr** , maybe I misunderstand your position, but wouldn’t the protection of disembodied speech be pointless, since such an entity could not enter a lawsuit and so the first amendment be effectively unenforceable in court? Other entities can enter a lawsuit if they can show that violating the freedom of such disembodied speech damages them. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Downtown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Mr\_Downtown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Downtown)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2011, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171/94 "2011-12-01T03:50:26Z")
It seems like you three are going round and round about a false premise that is completely irrelevant. Read the text. The First Amendment doesn’t create an individual right; **it restricts Congress.** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-corporate-person-hood/604171.md?page=4)