1996-05-20 - Re: Toastmasters?

Header Data

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
To: Senator Exon <remailer@2005.bart.nl>
Message Hash: 52ece7dacb10aaf04363f814523f47747791e3e8fed324b068cb257ab720b3c9
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960520074728.29440C-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
Reply To: <199605200437.GAA20138@spoof.bart.nl>
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-20 17:59:30 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 01:59:30 +0800

Raw message

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 01:59:30 +0800
To: Senator Exon <remailer@2005.bart.nl>
Subject: Re: Toastmasters?
In-Reply-To: <199605200437.GAA20138@spoof.bart.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960520074728.29440C-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Mon, 20 May 1996, Senator Exon wrote:

> How do corporations work, in terms of liability?  If the cost of 
> incorporating isn't forbidding, I would think a remailer operator might 
> consider incorporating a company, and making the remailer a function of 
> that company.  That way, any losses are restricted to the total value of 
> the corporation; that is, nothing.  Any flaws?  There must be something 
> wrong with it somewhere.

All the corporate officers are public knowledge.
The corporate veil can pretty easily be perferated if there is a willful
attempt to avoid liability when conduct gets above a certain threshold.

This would be pretty easy to show in the event the corporation never made
dime one and never intended to.

Using corporations as a shield is, in my view, less desireable than having
blinded remailers.

> Thanks.

My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell@pacifier.com