The whole point of corporations is that they are organized to do things (leaving good or bad out of it) that a person cannot do

Hardly, the point is to allow people to take some risks without risking all their assets. That’s it, that’s the entire point when they were created as people had been pooling assets long before corporations exited.

IMO, like bankruptcy laws in general it’s a generally a good idea. Where the nuances exists is what debts can’t be discharged in bankruptcy and at what point you pierce the corporate veil because several things remove the protections offered by creating a company.

One of the things we get wrong IMO is I think a corporation should be unable to shield itself from risk by creating another corporation. That creates all kinds of terrible incentives without any real upside.

But they’re also legally speaking “people” (persons) just to add insult to injury.

> they’re also legally speaking “people” (persons) just to add insult to injury

Yes, collective rights exist.

> Why do we tolerate behavior from corporations that we would absolutely despise if a person did it?

I don't see how an individual trading these data would be more or less despicable to the parties involved.

Picture a possessive ex peeping through your window with binoculars. Following you everywhere you go. Wiretapping your house. Hacking your accounts to see all your photos. You get the idea

A privacy watchdog really should publish an ad like that, to really drill into the common masses about what corporations do to us.

> Picture a possessive ex peeping through your window with binoculars. Following you everywhere you go. Wiretapping your house.

Except they don't need to do that. I can individually set up an app and spy on users and then aggregate that with other apps and buy and sell the data. That's the problem.

Put the other way: if a corporation hired a private eye to follow you everywehere and physically peep through your windows with binoculars, there would be backlash.