Right and this also explains other behavior. Take patents, for example. Microsoft took advantage of the laws pertaining to software patents and now that they have a massive patent portfolio, they use them to generate revenue and hurt competitors. And they try to influence the law to protect or enhance this revenue stream and competitive advantage. So Microsoft is somewhat a product of the legal terrain and the legal terrain is to some extent a reflection of Microsoft (and other companies).
And our congresspeople could be imagined as mini corporations. Instead of selling goods and services they sell political influence. Instead of shareholders they have constituents. And they often act according to their best financial interests.
Politicians are directly controlled by special interests. This is why we have John Deere using copyright laws to stop farmers from repairing their tractors, Intuit using tax law to protect it's expensive software, and patent trolls using abusive patent laws to extort entrepreneurs.
Congress is full of lawyers who assume that everyone has access to lawyers. That's why everything is so complex. In reality the big guys have lawyers on retainer and can handle the laws and the little guy is at a disadvantage.
The same happens in a lot of companies. IT develops rules for IT people and the regular user is screwed.
Yes, these senators and congressmen are literally so impressionable that the very fact that IBM and Microsoft and other companies are objecting cause these political leaders to become nervous and kill the bills (to put it kindly). It seems to me that America is now on the same page as most other nations: your laws are also bought-and-paid-for by special interest groups in many cases, just like our more corrupt nations and especially mine. Very sad.
This is a theoretical framework you are presenting but it does not reflect reality. The text of many bills is written by people working for corporations. A politician needs to get funding in order to be re-elected and have any meaningful ability to make a difference.
In theory all the power for determining laws is supposed to lie in the hands of the politicians, but in practice a significant fraction of the power lies in the hands of corporations. So it doesn’t make sense to only look at part of the power structure that has set the system up this way.
Every legal concept is entirely the government's creation, including both physical and intellectual property, so I'm not sure it's worth quibbling about that part.
Not entirely true. I want to point out that we have to consider how lobbying is influencing lawmakers.
Who contributes most to politicians - individuals, or corporations and PACs funded by non-listed corps?
And actually, who writes a significant part of new bills, some of which become laws? Yes, corps. It's not surprising then that the legal system has some extra benefits for the corporations.
First you need something core to start a bill around. Let's make a law that makes it easier to buy guns.
But no one is going to vote for that, so let's give it a name you CAN'T say no to. It will henceforth be known as "The Child and Family Home Protection Act".
Great we have a cool name and we have a law significant enough to send to the floor of congress. Now let's get enough people to promise to vote for it so we don't waste our time. Oh, Congressman X says that he would vote for it as long as we add another law about funding polar bear research. Sure, whatever just add it in, we need the votes. Congresswoman Y says she will vote for it if we add a law about requiring masks at church. We need the votes, tack it on. Congressman Z has been trying to get more tanks sent to Afghanistan for nearly a decade, if we add that in I bet he will vote for out law too.
Then these things get bundled up and sent to the floor where people vote on laws with fun marketing names added to them.
The same thing happens in business. You start off with a core project like a new ERP system. Give it a complex sounding name that no one in accounts payable will say no to. Then we add in a bunch of computers into the budget that we have been trying to get for 2 years. Add a new printer. Throw in some docker desktop licenses for our developers, and then bundle it up and send it to Accounts Payable. Bam, now you have docker desktop licenses and new computers. You're welcome.
Corporations do effectively make law, at least in the US. Politicians have neither the time nor the expertise. There have been some widely read articles about how sometimes that law is not even freely available to the public.
Is it really surprising that our politicians believe they are above the laws that they create? They believe the laws are for us sheep and not for the wolves. Look at the insider trading laws for Congress as an example.
And our congresspeople could be imagined as mini corporations. Instead of selling goods and services they sell political influence. Instead of shareholders they have constituents. And they often act according to their best financial interests.
reply