Corporate "Rights" a Joke (Score 1)

An underlying premise of this discussion seems to be that individual or corporate "rights" are at issue. These "rights", often described as "civil rights", are only those privileges proscribed by enacted legislation and are not FUNDAMENTAL or INALIENABLE rights spoken of by the great thinkers of Western civilization. These "rights", as proven by the DMCA and related changes, are fully subject to revision based upon the political whims of the times (read: follow the money trail, here). These civilly enacted privileges are similar to those enacted to make corporations "people", thus indemnifying shareholders against liability at the cost of society. The issue of Free Speech vs corporate intellectual properties is simple as true, Natual Rights must always be held as higher virtues than the privileges of artificial entities. If the shareholders really wanted to assert their indvidual rights to such properties, they would not hide behind corporate liability shields, but would take personal responsibility for their actions by engaging in their business through partnerships where they can be held individually responsible. The fact that our society grants artificial corporate entities (LP's, LLC's, Corps, LLP's) the same civil liberties as natural individuals is part of the underlying problem that creates situations like this. Will sports shareholders step up and personally sign those affidavits under penalty of perjury and be held personally and directly to account for the actions of their firms? Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.