Person?. . .

(from www.MoveToAmend.org)
When it comes to constitutions, the application of law, and common sense, the Supreme Court of the United States could learn a thing or two from President Judge Debbie O’Dell-Seneca of the Washington County Court of Common Pleas in Pennsylvania.

O’Dell-Seneca overruled a previous decision that sealed a settlement between a Mount Pleasant Township family and large energy corporations, which caused the family harm because of fracking on an adjacent property to their own. The Observer-Reporter and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette pressed the suit, which ultimately decided the public’s right to be informed outstripped the corporation’s right to privacy.

In fact, O’Dell-Seneca went much further than that. The judge asserted corporations have no constitutional rights:

“...the constitution vests in business entities no special rights that the laws of this Commonwealth cannot extinguish. In sum, [corporations] cannot assert [constitutional privacy] protections because they are not mentioned in its text.”

“...it is axiomatic that corporations, companies, and partnerships have no ‘spiritual nature,’ ‘feelings,’ ‘intellect,’ ‘beliefs,’ ‘thoughts,’ ‘emotions,’ or ‘sensations,’ because they do not exist in the manner that humankind exists… They cannot be ‘let alone’ by government, because businesses are but grapes, ripe upon the vine of the law, that the people of this Commonwealth raise, tend, and prune at their pleasure and need.”

Despite the mainstream media’s blackout on any reporting that calls into question corporate personhood, this recent decision is an important victory for our movement.

CELDF (Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund) Executive Director Thomas Linzey writes:  “The ruling represents the first crack in the judicial armor that has been so meticulously welded together by major corporations. And it affirms what many communities already know -- that change only occurs when people begin to openly question and challenge legal doctrines that have been treated as sacred by most lawyers and judges.”

Laws follow culture and the legal system adjusts as society's views shift. This case illustrates that we are collectively beginning to change hearts and minds about the appropriate role of the corporation in society, even amongst those who are entrenched in the current system.

What do you think?
Tell me at  
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html

My latest release, Black & White Then Back,
can be downloaded digitally at:

(or you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser:  http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/rayjozwiak3)

Also, be sure to visit:
http://www.rayjozwiak.com

Tweet

Dear Mr. Jozwiak. . .

". . . The PROTECT IP Act (S. 968) would give the Department of Justice (DoJ) authority to identify and take legal action against websites that market counterfeit or pirated goods.

Illegal downloading of movies, TV shows and music is a real problem that harms industries, kills jobs and hurts our economy.  We need strong copyright laws to protect the creative property of artists, and it is important that these laws be followed.  However, I share your concerns about this bill.  We need to make sure that the solution isn't worse than the problem.  Any efforts to strengthen the protection of copyrighted materials must be well planned, avoid unintended consequences, and must not stifle free speech or innovation Legislation as wide-ranging as this needs a more open and thorough review from all sides of the debate.  I am pleased that Senator Leahy — the author of the bill — has said he is open to changes to address this and other issues.  The current language in the bill needs to be improved before I could consider supporting its final passage. . . "
Senator Barbara Mikulski


Dear Mr. Jozwiak,
 ". . .SOPA is a hard hitting attempt to address the legitimate problem of illegal downloads of copyrighted work like movies, television shows and music.  I believe that artists and the companies that create content should be able to protect their information.  However, this legislation forces Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to be the policing authorities on the beat to find, hunt, and shut down illegal pirate websites or the service provider is held liable for the copyright infringement. ISPs will have to maintain a list of banned websites.  While SOPA would act as a filter for offending websites, as soon as these websites are shut down, similar copies are set up very quickly. ISPs and the Department of Justice will spend their time going after pirate websites that can be renamed and changed in an instant.  I do not believe this is the most efficient way to solve the problem of piracy.

As ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I work closely on various cyber security issues.  Both the Sandia National Laboratory and the Department of Homeland Security took the position that SOPA will hurt U.S. efforts to keep our networks secure and safe from serious cyber attacks. As it stands now, SOPA is a one sided firewall that would hinder our ability to go after the real offenders and threats to our networks, while simultaneously limiting innovation and free speech. I hope that all stake holders can sit down and develop a compromise solution that avoids these problems. . . "
C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger
Member of Congress


(from IndieMusic News)

". . . Lamar Smith, the chief sponsor of SOPA, said on Friday that he is pulling the bill “until there is wider agreement on a solution.”
“I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy,” Smith (R-Texas) said. “It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.”

What do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html


Download your
very own copy of
ANOTHER SHOT
by Ray Jozwiak

Please Visit
http://www.rayjozwiak.com

Tweet