Are corporations people? Options

[thekohser]

A Wikipedia essay that tried to extend WP:BLP protections to articles about corporations was recently burned and scattered to the wind -- the "public" reason being the essay was created by a banned user. I think the "private" reason is one more familiar to us, though -- such a policy would fly in the face of Wikipedia's real purpose as the world's largest online defamation platform.

How can you tweak Crisco's nose, if you're going to be subjected to duty of care policies about corporations?!

Anyway, I have asked three administrators if they would issue me the contents of the deleted essay. One has refused, while the other two have not responded.

Is there a functional admin somewhere who could reproduce here the contents of the deleted essay?

This post has been edited by thekohser:

[Rhindle]

Corporate personhood provides just the benefits of a person but not the negatives. Why can't a corporation be prosecuted for murder? A family can't prosecute a tobacco company for their father's death from smoking. It's possible a D.A. might give it a try but a judge would most likely throw the case out since most American judges are pro-business anyway. Also, say a case is heard and the corporation does get convicted how would you punish it?

[Milton Roe]

Corporate personhood provides just the benefits of a person but not the negatives. Why can't a corporation be prosecuted for murder? A family can't prosecute a tobacco company for their father's death from smoking. It's possible a D.A. might give it a try but a judge would most likely throw the case out since most American judges are pro-business anyway. Also, say a case is heard and the corporation does get convicted how would you punish it?

You can punish the people who actually made the corporate decisions. Also, corporations can be fined and even subjected to the corporate "death penalty" of decapitation, dismemberment, or receivership.

[anthony]

Also, corporations can be fined and even subjected to the corporate "death penalty" of decapitation, dismemberment, or receivership.

And a mistaken "corporate death penalty" can be nearly as difficult to undo as the personal death penalty.

On May 31, 2005, in the case Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction due to what it saw as serious flaws in the jury instructions.[5] In the court's view, the instructions were far too vague to allow a jury to find obstruction of justice had really occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, was also highly skeptical of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose even without knowing an act is unlawful.