3 ms·

Corporations can be defamed?

by cess11 3y ago

gruez 3y ago
Why can't they?
- cess11 3y ago
  It's a fictive person and not a real one?
  - withinboredom 3y ago
    In the US, corps can have religious beliefs… so maybe a real entity?
  - gruez 3y ago
    Corporations being "fictive person" (whatever that means) isn't a relevant factor. What does matter is that they are legal persons[1], and therefore can sue people under tort law. It's not hard to find defamation cases where corporations are the plaintiffs[2]. In fact corporations suing people for defamation is such a big issue that there's even legislation to prevent it from being abused[3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#In_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#In_the_Un... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsidian_Finance_Group,_LLC_v._Cox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsidian_Finance_Group,_LLC_v.... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ...
    - cess11 3y ago
      Yes, 'legal person', as opposed to real or physical person, i.e. a fictive person. In the US, can other fictive persons sue for defamation too? If I walk around in a US city with a sign claiming that Barney the dinosaur stole diapers from orphans and use hard drugs, is that legally defamation? Or is it restricted to fictions used to name and organise economic activity, is it money and bookkeeping that creates this particular personhood?
      - gruez 3y ago
        > Yes, 'legal person', as opposed to real or physical person, i.e. a fictive person. >In the US, can other fictive persons sue for defamation too? The case law is pretty clear that yes, corporations can sue for defamation. As I mentioned before, you can find plenty of appellate-level cases where corporations have sued others for defamation. The fact that nobody has seriously tried to have such cases quashed on account of "corporations are fictive persons" or whatever suggests that it's not a serious legal argument worth considering. Arguing over this makes as much sense as arguing whether driving a car counts as "traveling" and whether that's protected by the constitution or not[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement#Traffic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement#Tra...
        cess11 3y ago
        You forgot to answer my question. If you think it's fine and dandy that fictions are treated as if they're real in courts, that's just like your opinion, man. Where I live, fictions aren't treated that way. The closest thing we have is immaterial rights, copyright and the like, 'protecting the fruits of spiritual labour'.
        gruez 3y ago
        >If you think it's fine and dandy that fictions are treated as if they're real in courts, that's just like your opinion, man. 1. it's not just "like [my] opinion, man", it's how the legal system works in the US and most common law jurisdictions. You thinking otherwise makes as much sense as the people who think they don't need driver's licenses because they're not "driving", they're "traveling". 2. It sounds like you reject the concept of corporate personhood entirely. That's fine and all, but it's weird to bring that up when talking about tangential topics (eg. whether you can be sued for providing false information). It's even more weird to bring it up in a manner that suggests you're describing how the legal system works, rather than your opinion on how it ought to act. >Where I live, fictions aren't treated that way And what jurisdiction is that?

Corporations can be defamed?

by cess11 3y ago

Corporations can be defamed?

gruez 3y ago

Why can't they?

cess11 3y ago
It's a fictive person and not a real one?
- withinboredom 3y ago
  In the US, corps can have religious beliefs… so maybe a real entity?
- gruez 3y ago
  Corporations being "fictive person" (whatever that means) isn't a relevant factor. What does matter is that they are legal persons[1], and therefore can sue people under tort law. It's not hard to find defamation cases where corporations are the plaintiffs[2]. In fact corporations suing people for defamation is such a big issue that there's even legislation to prevent it from being abused[3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#In_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood#In_the_Un... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsidian_Finance_Group,_LLC_v._Cox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsidian_Finance_Group,_LLC_v.... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ...
  - cess11 3y ago
    Yes, 'legal person', as opposed to real or physical person, i.e. a fictive person. In the US, can other fictive persons sue for defamation too? If I walk around in a US city with a sign claiming that Barney the dinosaur stole diapers from orphans and use hard drugs, is that legally defamation? Or is it restricted to fictions used to name and organise economic activity, is it money and bookkeeping that creates this particular personhood?
    - gruez 3y ago
      > Yes, 'legal person', as opposed to real or physical person, i.e. a fictive person. >In the US, can other fictive persons sue for defamation too? The case law is pretty clear that yes, corporations can sue for defamation. As I mentioned before, you can find plenty of appellate-level cases where corporations have sued others for defamation. The fact that nobody has seriously tried to have such cases quashed on account of "corporations are fictive persons" or whatever suggests that it's not a serious legal argument worth considering. Arguing over this makes as much sense as arguing whether driving a car counts as "traveling" and whether that's protected by the constitution or not[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement#Traffic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement#Tra...
      - cess11 3y ago
        You forgot to answer my question. If you think it's fine and dandy that fictions are treated as if they're real in courts, that's just like your opinion, man. Where I live, fictions aren't treated that way. The closest thing we have is immaterial rights, copyright and the like, 'protecting the fruits of spiritual labour'.
        gruez 3y ago
        >If you think it's fine and dandy that fictions are treated as if they're real in courts, that's just like your opinion, man. 1. it's not just "like [my] opinion, man", it's how the legal system works in the US and most common law jurisdictions. You thinking otherwise makes as much sense as the people who think they don't need driver's licenses because they're not "driving", they're "traveling". 2. It sounds like you reject the concept of corporate personhood entirely. That's fine and all, but it's weird to bring that up when talking about tangential topics (eg. whether you can be sued for providing false information). It's even more weird to bring it up in a manner that suggests you're describing how the legal system works, rather than your opinion on how it ought to act. >Where I live, fictions aren't treated that way And what jurisdiction is that?