History of Corporations

Early roots, Japan 5th century; Sweden 14th century, as royal charter grants

East India Company; British merchant adventurers granted Royal Charter of Queen Elizabeth I in 1600

British "companies" equivalent to US "corporations", versus "corporations" in Common Law closer to charters from
monarchs. Word semantics internationally have many complex variants.

Dartmouth 1816 case, state does not have power to revoke former King's Charter grant

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 US 394 (1886) Clerk's headnotes in Reporter to case discuss
court not reaching 14th Am. "natural person" arguments, later interpreted as if corporations defined as "natural persons", vs
legal fiction "persons" as entities of state law only.

Modern corporations are legal creatures of states, historically often requiring a legislature or other formal grant or charter in
line with British monarchy history, but today usually just registration of paperwork and certifications of certain facts, eg, list
officers or board members, structure (voting stockholders, members without ownership (most non-profits, some others),
have basic operating funds, agent for service, etc.

In practice, rules for corporations are more defined by other law than state corporate law per se, eg, state and Federal tax
law, securities and investments, election, regulated industries, labor, public accommodations, etc. There are many business
twists for private vs public ownership, or closely held small businesses that may not be corporations in some cases, but have
traits of them, eg S-corps, LLC's, Limited Partnerships where a General Partner may be an operating corporation. Elections
are shaped by nonprofit types, eg 501(c)x's, where -3's are able to pass IRS deductions to donors but are banned from
"substantial political activities" they circumvent (education, social charities, religion types), -4's that can't pass deductions
back but may be political advocacy groups (often coupled with -3's in nearly all large well known cases, eg, ACLU entities
(over 100 for states or national), NRA vs ILA, etc). There are also HOA's, "monasteries" (that may be industrial communes or
religious businesses), "dark money" super-PAC's, etc. Emerging trends in corporate structures and values include B-Corps, an
initiative of the last two decades first added to some state laws as of 2010. "Public benefit" companies allow balancing
social goals with the traditional legal mandate that officers "maximize share value and return on investment" to
shareholders, above all else (for most common C-corps, etc).

In theory historic corporations or equivalents were designed to enable limited government powers to be granted to privately
managed operations, subject to revocation or other penalties for violations of those terms. Modern corporations retain
those liability shells of quasi-government monarchy based privilege, while often under state laws with numerous minor
variants, allow "any other lawful purpose" as a ByLaws provision, and not ban nested ownership or control of other
corporations or entities, as had been a historic norm. The modern corporation is an offshoot of the Industrial Revolution,
where raising capital for large industries and creating infrastructure for employment and production of goods required
investments to be managed by people whose actions weren't controlled by or fully visible to passive investors; in turn,
investors were shielded from liability for more than loss of invested funds. However, officers were also given immunity from
prosecution for most crimes or otherwise illegal acts, outside narrow conditions for "piercing the shield" of quasi-monarchy
style immunity. There are also reasons to ban church corporations, many based on tax law details, but also case law that
holds a court cannot rule on issues based in religious ByLaws, while the IRS does so regularly, and many corporate
malfeasance issues of churches are rooted in just that. If no court of competent jurisdiction exists to oversee core law of that
class of corporations, how can they legitimately exist as a quasi-state legal franchise?
Those structures are generally designed to have some common elements across state and Federal laws that vary widely over
details, in order to function under Uniform Commercial Code adopted with minor variants in all states' laws but also
applicable to proprietorships and individual persons, and the Federal Commerce Clause for interstate business and finance.
They're also modified by huge bodies of other regulatory systems and laws, plus the nested errors and frauds when courts
try to make rulings consistent with past problems rather than tackle their own errors. That applies when Southern Pacific
Railroad is misinterpreted to grant corporations status as "natural persons" under the 14th Amendment, versus "legal
persons" of Common Law modified somehow in the USA to remove British traditions of royalty as their basis, or when the
16th Amendment is presumed ratified, despite Philander Knox's 1913 lame duck period fraud in so certifying it as Sec. of
State, despite well documented evidence that was a big lie.

Most corporations are small businesses, and C-corps just like most huge businesses, used to attempt to protect owners from
acts of bad employees or quirks of complex laws that can't be insured against and could otherwise crush the individual
owners. Many corporations are state presences of larger parents, where it's interesting to inspect NY records and compare
Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google (Alphabet), as to their respective foreign (meaning other state, not nations) registry, local
entities and divisions or consolidated operations, or other businesses with legally distinct but confusingly similar names.

https://appext20.dos.ny.gov/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.SELECT_ENTITY

Search Google, Yahoo, and Bing for "ANGELE BRILIHON BOLOU-ABODO", and compare results, including for news reports
versus a satirical ridicule site like Chimpmania that actually reports more facts accurately than most so-called news sites.

How many errors does lawyer RYANNE GUY KONAN make filing civil suits against those search engine operators, as to mixing
and scrambling their respective local offices versus corporate agents, like CSC or CTCS? How does that sex video unintended
star compare to Erin Andrews or Terry Bolea (Hulk Hogan) cases, where courts issued judgments larger than would be typical
in wrongful death actions were they killed by drunk drivers? What does that say about complexity of massive corporate
nested shells, or penalties needed to hurt huge bad actors, versus ones in line with damages for other cases? Erin Andrews
and her lawyers did everything in the "don't do this unless you're seeking attention" guides for celebrities, to draw attention
to her own peephole videos she claimed to be hurt by viewers seeing, so how was she not mostly liable for her own alleged
damages? How does that compare to Melanija Knavs aka Melania Knauss Trump, and use of her porn model images and
video to market Pornhub and other sites for far better produced products? How does it relate to EU "right to be forgotten"
law and the former Grand Prix head found to buy brothel services from Nazi uniformed Dominatrixes, or the loss of career to
one UK spy agency worker whose wife turned out to be one of those brothel workers?

Yet another family of corporations are municipal corporations or their utility districts. They raise all sorts of additional issues
as to immunity for violent criminal cops and financial and political scammers, or how they may vary under different state
laws or court opinions as being independent operations, or delegated state authorities with many related conditions for
operation or management being taken over by states conditionally.

Today there are challenges in keeping a legal system functional, with many corporations larger than actual nation states,
companies like Facebook and some mega-pharma officially basing themselves in Ireland due to incredibly tiny liability caps,
or coercion contracts that are fundamentally illegal and void under core legal tenets, becoming a norm mass commerce
systems rely on millions of times a day, without being voided by courts. In politics, the RRR and GOP are tactically effective
and treacherous in use of "dark money" astroturf, but while MoveOn is known for actions like flashmobs of grassroots
chanting that Target ain't people, MoveOn itself is Soros dark money corporate astroturf. That's become a huge house of
legal cards, that might well collapse as void for vagueness and failing other core tenets of law, if historic frauds and errors
were acted on honestly by modern courts, that instead tend to bury serious issues of inconvenient truths.