Suchergebnisse

The topic of corporate personhood has captured the attention of many who are concerned about the increasing presence, power, and influence of corporations in modern society. Recent Supreme Court cases like Citizens United, Hobby Lobby, and Masterpiece Cakeshop - which solidified the free speech and religious liberty rights of corporations and their owners - have heightened the controversy over treating corporations as persons under the law. What does it mean to say that the corporation is a person, and why does it matter? In Corporate Personhood, Susanna Kim Ripken addresses these questions and highlights the complexity of the corporate personhood concept. Using a broad, interdisciplinary framework - incorporating law, economics, philosophy, sociology, psychology, organizational theory, political science, and linguistics - this highly original work explores the complex, multidimensional nature of corporate personhood and its implications for corporate rights and duties.

AbstractAnthropological models of personhood suggest that the individual is produced through relational ties to others, including humans and nonhumans. American ideas about the individual are deeply ideological, obscuring the human relations that make 'personhood' a possible, desirable concept that motivates subjection. Attending to neurological disorders and the technologies that attempt to remedy communication impairments shows that not only is the labour of other humans obscured in producing the individual, but so are the facilitating capacities of technologies and institutions. This article focuses on memoirs of disability and ethnographic and historiographic research on neuroscience to show how personhood is facilitated and produced through engagements with people, technologies, and institutions that attempt to render particular forms of subjection through communicative practices.

In early 2020, the rapid adoption of remote and communication tools by governments, businesses and individuals around the world increased their reliance on cyber infrastructure for the normal functioning of countries, businesses and businesses. And in some parts of society, the urgent need for communication, while protecting human life, takes precedence over ensuring that these communication tools are safe and resilient. However, the question is raised as to whether these tools should be considered important infrastructure or more important, depending on their tight inclusion in everyday life around the world. In many countries, the important importance of the environment to sustain human life has been recognized by extending the legal personality, or legal rights, to the environmental entity. Countries like Colombia, Ecuador, New Zealand and India have generally granted legal rights to various rivers, lakes, parks and nature. This article explores future possibilities and examples, allowing the country to consider granting legal rights to other very important institutions that are unrecognized. Human Life Looking to the future of becoming increasingly dependent on highly interdependent systems in cyberspace, could these systems be personalized? The impact of remote operations and cybersecurity can lead to a whole new perception of the importance of cyberspace dependence and, as a result, new legal treatment. Against the backdrop of extensive debate on cyberspace legislation, including the law of war, this is a more complex legal consideration, especially in the light of cross-border dependencies and systems affecting multiple jurisdictions. Is to raise. Through cyber biomimetics, this white paper adopts a blue-sky conceptual approach to study policy considerations and potential impacts when highly interdependent cyber systems in the distant future receive the same protection as environmental factors.

Wennemann argues that the traditional concept of personhood may be fruitfully applied to the ethical challenge we face in a posthuman age. The book posits that biologically non-human persons like robots, computers, or aliens are a theoretical possibility but that we do not know if they are a real possibility

Several states have recently changed their business organization law to accommodate autonomous businesses—businesses operated entirely through computer code. A variety of international civil society groups are also actively developing new frameworks— and a model law—for enabling decentralized, autonomous businesses to achieve a corporate or corporate-like status that bestows legal personhood. Meanwhile, various jurisdictions, including the European Union, have considered whether and to what extent artificial intelligence (AI) more broadly should be endowed with personhood to respond to AI's increasing presence in society. Despite the fairly obvious overlap between the two sets of inquiries, the legal and policy discussions between the two only rarely overlap. As a result of this failure to communicate, both areas of personhood theory fail to account for the important role that socio-technical and socio-legal context plays in law and policy development. This Article fills the gap by investigating the limits of artificial rights at the intersection of corporations and artificial intelligence. Specifically, this Article argues that building a comprehensive legal approach to artificial rights—rights enjoyed by artificial people, whether corporate entity, machine, or otherwise—requires approaching the issue through a systems lens to ensure that the legal system adequately considers the varied socio-technical contexts in which artificial people exist. To make these claims, this Article begins by establishing a terminology baseline, and emphasizing the importance of viewing AI as part of a socio-technical system. Part I then concludes by reviewing the existing ecosystem of autonomous corporations. Parts II and III then examine the existing debates around artificially intelligent persons and corporate personhood, arguing that the socio-legal needs driving artificial personhood debates in both contexts include: protecting the rights of natural people, upholding social values, and creating a fiction for legal convenience. ...

"This book examines the relationship between Ubuntu and the idea of personhood. Ubuntu in its broadest sense is rooted in the belief that the full development of personhood comes with shared identity and the idea that an individual's humanity is fostered in a network of relationships: I am because you are; we are because you are. The chapters in this book seek to interrogate this relational quality of personhood embodied in Ubuntu. The book further seeks to examine whether we can talk about relational personhood without running the risk of essentialism. It argues that no human society is possible without a network of relations, which involves, among other elements, communication and interaction between individuals. It is a critical engagement with how Ubuntu shapes those ethical values of connectedness and interdependence within society. The book also asks whether we can find relevance in Ubuntu as an ethical value system, which is likely to mediate our daily activities and the social institutions, which serve communities in post-colonial societies"--