On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 11:09:29AM +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Needless to say, nothing could be further from the letter and spirit of the First Amendment.
I thought the Constitution applies to personal speech, not to corporate or government speech...
If I speak for myself, the First Amendment applies.
But should it apply even to corporations? Are such entities considered to be persons? Should they have "rights"?
I don't believe that corporations do have rights, or at least they certainly shouldn't. There is a case before the Supreme Court as we speak about whether Nike has a right to freedom of speech. Hopefully they will say no, which would end corporate political contributions, the bane of our current political situation. However, along with freedom of speech, there is also a First Amendment "freedom of the press" as well, so the press, including newspapers, can
On Wed, April 30, 2003 10:28 AM, Harmon Seaver wrote: print
anything they want unless it's libel.
Which would lead to the question of why would (Nike) not just have "(Nike) News" - a newspaper or similar entity, completely hand-assed. The distinction between the press and non-press would appear to be difficult to define in anything like legally binding terms anyhow. (Not that I'd know.) FB`