We really need to "think" about what this article tells us?
And shouldn't all 'newbie' members be "reading between the lines", for an easy *beginner's) lesson here?
What lesson?
That men/women 'acting' in a corporate position (a dead fiction NAME), on behalf of corporations - need living flesh and blood men/women to CONsent to being a corporate NAME - before they can then FINE them?
Have Google Lawyers become aware of the "LOSE the NAME...WIN the GAME" solution?
Who can we "make" responsible? Who can we "punish"?
While corporations can only "talk" to other corporations - corporations cannot "write" Tickets out. They are a 'dead' person. And the corporate "California DMV" (Department of Motor Vehicles) are very much aware of this being the case.
Google (as the corporate person) could never "hear/read/respond to" any Infringement NOTICES written out by living men/women policy enforcers, that their driverless cars may ever incur. Google is a dead person.
The "California DMV" legally needs living men/women to respond to their Infringement NOTICES - just as all the "corporate" crooks we have here in Australia, do.
This paragraph makes this "fact", so very clear to us all.
< There had been some questions about who would be legally responsible in case of an accident or moving violation, and while Google Inc was quick to accept responsibility it sounds like the DMV isn’t interested in writing tickets to a ‘corporate person’. >
[Copy and "save" this article for further reference, if this is all new to you?]
That men/women 'acting' in a corporate position (a dead fiction NAME), on behalf of corporations - need living flesh and blood men/women to CONsent to being a corporate NAME - before they can then FINE them?
Have Google Lawyers become aware of the "LOSE the NAME...WIN the GAME" solution?
Who can we "make" responsible? Who can we "punish"?
While corporations can only "talk" to other corporations - corporations cannot "write" Tickets out. They are a 'dead' person. And the corporate "California DMV" (Department of Motor Vehicles) are very much aware of this being the case.
Google (as the corporate person) could never "hear/read/respond to" any Infringement NOTICES written out by living men/women policy enforcers, that their driverless cars may ever incur. Google is a dead person.
The "California DMV" legally needs living men/women to respond to their Infringement NOTICES - just as all the "corporate" crooks we have here in Australia, do.
This paragraph makes this "fact", so very clear to us all.
< There had been some questions about who would be legally responsible in case of an accident or moving violation, and while Google Inc was quick to accept responsibility it sounds like the DMV isn’t interested in writing tickets to a ‘corporate person’. >
[Copy and "save" this article for further reference, if this is all new to you?]
No comments:
Post a Comment