4 ms·

Most companies probably do not own resources like land. What actual use do you have for this information? Beyond “it’s nice to know”? Is it not sufficient tha

by prvit 4y ago

Most companies probably do not own resources like land. What actual use do you have for this information? Beyond “it’s nice to know”? Is it not sufficient that you have a service address for the legal entity in case you need to sue it?

shadowgovt 4y ago
Land was an example, not an exclusive example. A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells. And most legal actions against such abuse generally start grassroots; regulators aren't aware there's a problem until people complain. Hiding information from the public makes it harder to notice abuse. Flip the script: when an individual has incorporated and is enjoying the legal protections of being a corporate entity, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society?
- prvit 4y ago
  When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society? The real question you have to answer is “Why is it necessary for company ownership to be public information?” > A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells What’s wrong here? Even with a perfect UBO registry that private owner could just get together with a couple of their buddies and divvy up that 70%. What legal action are you going to take? Owning 70% of a town’s resources is generally not against the law.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    > When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? It's not. They carry a driver's license and law enforcement can reference their name by license plate.
    - prvit 4y ago
      But that information isn’t public, it’s only visible to law enforcement. This is how company ownership information should be treated too.
      - mkconor 4y ago
        Other users of the road do most of the enforcement. The police often get involved only at the behest of another user or if certain levels of misconduct are breached. It sounds like this transparency allows other citizens to do the low-level enforcement: organizing against an unwanted company buying that attempting to acquire more ownership your town might be analogous to honking, tailgating, etc.
      - dang 4y ago
        We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33804753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33804753. (This is not about the parent comment—I'm just posting a reply here for clarity because the other post is already several days old.)
        prvit 4y ago
        I'll just clear my cookies, change my VPN exit and continue posting. What's the point?
        dang 4y ago
        There are several points. One is to signal to the community that it's not ok to post like this. Most people don't want to get banned and do genuinely want to use the site as intended. Leaving a public trail of moderation comments and actions helps regulate community behavior, even if it doesn't have that effect on you. Another is that I prefer to (try to) persuade users that it's in their interest not to abuse HN. HN is only interesting because there is a somewhat* higher quality of discussion and content here. When you post aggressively, violate the site guidelines, and so on, you're damaging the ecosystem and contributing to destroying HN as an interesting place. That is not in your interest. I assume that you wouldn't drop a lit match in a dry forest, or dump engine oil in a mountain lake, or throw trash in a park that you enjoy. Why do the equivalent here? (* I don't want to overstate that—a lot of posts also suck. But it's all relative, and there aren't many places on the internet to have the sort of discussion that, at its best, goes on here.)
  - int_19h 4y ago
    Given that corporate charter is a grant by the government acting on behalf of society at large, the question is not whether company ownership being public should be necessary, but whether it benefits society. There's no natural right to form legal entities distinct from one's person with no strings attached.
arisAlexis 4y ago
Most people are not ill why need hospitals? Most people are not criminals why need police?

by prvit 4y ago

shadowgovt 4y ago

Land was an example, not an exclusive example. A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells. And most legal actions against such abuse generally start grassroots; regulators aren't aware there's a problem until people complain. Hiding information from the public makes it harder to notice abuse. Flip the script: when an individual has incorporated and is enjoying the legal protections of being a corporate entity, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society?

prvit 4y ago
When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? What value in the society of granting them that privilege when they are enjoying legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by all members of society? The real question you have to answer is “Why is it necessary for company ownership to be public information?” > A service address isn't sufficient to, for example, easily piece together that one private owner has quietly purchased 70% of some town's resources, especially if they've done so via a collection of shells What’s wrong here? Even with a perfect UBO registry that private owner could just get together with a couple of their buddies and divvy up that 70%. What legal action are you going to take? Owning 70% of a town’s resources is generally not against the law.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  > When an individual has registered a car and is enjoying the right to operate a 6000 lbs death machine on public roads, why do they need their name hidden? It's not. They carry a driver's license and law enforcement can reference their name by license plate.
  - prvit 4y ago
    But that information isn’t public, it’s only visible to law enforcement. This is how company ownership information should be treated too.
    - mkconor 4y ago
      Other users of the road do most of the enforcement. The police often get involved only at the behest of another user or if certain levels of misconduct are breached. It sounds like this transparency allows other citizens to do the low-level enforcement: organizing against an unwanted company buying that attempting to acquire more ownership your town might be analogous to honking, tailgating, etc.
    - dang 4y ago
      We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33804753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33804753. (This is not about the parent comment—I'm just posting a reply here for clarity because the other post is already several days old.)
      - prvit 4y ago
        I'll just clear my cookies, change my VPN exit and continue posting. What's the point?
        dang 4y ago
        There are several points. One is to signal to the community that it's not ok to post like this. Most people don't want to get banned and do genuinely want to use the site as intended. Leaving a public trail of moderation comments and actions helps regulate community behavior, even if it doesn't have that effect on you. Another is that I prefer to (try to) persuade users that it's in their interest not to abuse HN. HN is only interesting because there is a somewhat* higher quality of discussion and content here. When you post aggressively, violate the site guidelines, and so on, you're damaging the ecosystem and contributing to destroying HN as an interesting place. That is not in your interest. I assume that you wouldn't drop a lit match in a dry forest, or dump engine oil in a mountain lake, or throw trash in a park that you enjoy. Why do the equivalent here? (* I don't want to overstate that—a lot of posts also suck. But it's all relative, and there aren't many places on the internet to have the sort of discussion that, at its best, goes on here.)
- int_19h 4y ago
  Given that corporate charter is a grant by the government acting on behalf of society at large, the question is not whether company ownership being public should be necessary, but whether it benefits society. There's no natural right to form legal entities distinct from one's person with no strings attached.

arisAlexis 4y ago

Most people are not ill why need hospitals? Most people are not criminals why need police?