6 ms·

I can see both sides of the argument, if you want to protect personal data then that arguably must also include the personal data of the owner of a company. On

by hnarn 4y ago

I can see both sides of the argument, if you want to protect personal data then that arguably must also include the personal data of the owner of a company. On the other hand, many countries have strong principles regarding freedom of speech and data transparency. In the country where I'm from, for example, you can easily look up the full name and address of any citizen on multiple online services, since this data is fundamentally open from multiple government sources. When it comes to protecting the data of private citizens not owning a company, I'm actually more inclined to see that people think this is weird, but I personally still think it's a valuable asset to keeping our society open, being able to see where people legally claim their residence is and so on. There are still mechanisms in place for protected identities that can be used when necessary. However, if you own a company, my line of thought is that you almost start crossing into the "public person" argument. If you want to prioritize your privacy, that's fine, but if you start posting things on Instagram under your own name and you become a celebrity, you have to accept that the amount of criticism and exposure you may get increases due to the choice you made. In my mind, the same thing applies to some extent if you start a company. If you start a company, you have elected to enter the "stage" so to speak of the common market, and you are choosing to become a more prominent figure in society than you otherwise would have been. So in my mind, it doesn't really make sense to argue for the privacy rights of company owners over the privacy rights of "regular" individuals. Another thing is that owning a company is, in most cases when it's a "limited" one at least, a privilege given to you where you can separate your personal debts and responsibilities from that of the company. I also think it makes sense that this privilege should not be without cost -- you are already enjoying the legal benefit of being separated from your company, I think being public and transparent about who "you" are that's enjoying this benefit is the least we could do to maintain transparency in that responsibility-removing system.

_8j50 4y ago
Owning a company is not a right but a privilege and as such individual rights like privacy don't apply. Much like how driving a car is not a right, you can't say you will do a 90% tint on your window for the sake of privacy or hide your license plate so you won't be tracked.
- rat9988 4y ago
  Owning a company is a right not a privilege. You need to be able to setup to gain your livelihood.
  - hnarn 4y ago
    There are different types of companies which is exactly my point, both of you simply talk about "companies" but it's not that simple. There's a huge difference between a company where you have personal liability for everything the company does, and a limited liability company where you are controlling a "legal person" (the company). The latter is, in my mind, definitely a privilege, because society has given you a "proxy" to more freely do business without having to worry about personal responsibility. If we're talking about a company where you have personal liability, it's no more a privilege than having a regular job is. The differences between these two types of companies are very important, and leads to very different consequences.
    - _8j50 4y ago
      I disagree even with personal liability because you are offering goods and services to the public. Not only is what you sell/offer regulated (drug dealers are not really business owners) your ability to refuse service or employment based on protected classes is regulated. Just like driving a car is regulated on public roads, owning a public business is regulated and as such privileged.
  - _8j50 4y ago
    You can setup a private association, that is your right. A company in this context is a business that offers goods and services to the public at large. Your ability to operate such a business is preconditioned on many factors, some small like the commerce association doesn't like it or big like you are selling poison,scamming or refusing to serve people based on protected class. You do not have the right to offer arbitrary goods and services in exchange for money but the privilege is granted if the government and commerce association grant it. This is also why in under any context companies cannot be people because their very existence is a privilege granted by society and it is exactly why they want to be treated like a person -- so they can enjoy rights.

by hnarn 4y ago

_8j50 4y ago

Owning a company is not a right but a privilege and as such individual rights like privacy don't apply. Much like how driving a car is not a right, you can't say you will do a 90% tint on your window for the sake of privacy or hide your license plate so you won't be tracked.

rat9988 4y ago
Owning a company is a right not a privilege. You need to be able to setup to gain your livelihood.
- hnarn 4y ago
  There are different types of companies which is exactly my point, both of you simply talk about "companies" but it's not that simple. There's a huge difference between a company where you have personal liability for everything the company does, and a limited liability company where you are controlling a "legal person" (the company). The latter is, in my mind, definitely a privilege, because society has given you a "proxy" to more freely do business without having to worry about personal responsibility. If we're talking about a company where you have personal liability, it's no more a privilege than having a regular job is. The differences between these two types of companies are very important, and leads to very different consequences.
  - _8j50 4y ago
    I disagree even with personal liability because you are offering goods and services to the public. Not only is what you sell/offer regulated (drug dealers are not really business owners) your ability to refuse service or employment based on protected classes is regulated. Just like driving a car is regulated on public roads, owning a public business is regulated and as such privileged.
- _8j50 4y ago
  You can setup a private association, that is your right. A company in this context is a business that offers goods and services to the public at large. Your ability to operate such a business is preconditioned on many factors, some small like the commerce association doesn't like it or big like you are selling poison,scamming or refusing to serve people based on protected class. You do not have the right to offer arbitrary goods and services in exchange for money but the privilege is granted if the government and commerce association grant it. This is also why in under any context companies cannot be people because their very existence is a privilege granted by society and it is exactly why they want to be treated like a person -- so they can enjoy rights.