4 ms·
ftfy: They will go to the supreme court to fight for [a sole proprietor's] right not to sell cupcakes to gay people but then turn around and demand to control
by brandonmenc 6y ago
ftfy:
They will go to the supreme court to fight for [a sole proprietor's] right not to sell cupcakes to gay people but then turn around and demand to control what [giant corporation] does with their servers.
- ProcNetDev 6y agoSo if @Jack solely owned twitter it would be ok? I don't see how being on the NYSE makes the morals any different. If anything having a board of directors and shareholders makes TWTR more democratic not less.
- brandonmenc 6y ago> So if @Jack solely owned twitter it would be ok? This is a nonsense hypothetical. Without limited liability, Twitter would not exist in its current form or size.
- swixi 6y agoWhat does limited liability have to do with a corporation being owned by one person? I assume this poster is questioning the "giant corporation" part. Maybe you meant to say "any corporation"?
- brandonmenc 6y ago> Maybe you meant to say "any corporation"? Correct. I also mistakenly thought the cake baker was a sole proprietor. They are incorporated. I should have done a simple search before posting my original comment. That said, I now mostly agree with the comment I was originally replying to. > What does limited liability have to do with a corporation being owned by one person? Correct, nothing. To clarify: My position is that an entity enjoying limited liability (which in the US includes an LLC or corporation owned by a single person) has exchanged "rights" for indemnity and therefore can be compelled to - for example - bake a cake or not censor content hosted on their servers, but that a sole proprietor can do whatever they want re: refusing service or moderating content.
- srtjstjsj 6y agoHobby Lobby, for example, is not a sole proprietor.