Corporate transparency

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article does not cite any references or sources. (July 2006)
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.

For other definitions of transparency, see Transparency.

Corporate transparency is a form of radical transparency : The construct removing all barriers to - and facilitating of - free and easy public access to corporate, political and personal information and the laws, rules, social connivance and processes that facilitate and protect those individuals and corporations who freely join, develop and embellish the process. The goal of radical transparency is:

Complete personal and corporate transparency.
The health, safety, and wellbeing of individuals, neighborhoods, communities, institutions, governments and social support systems that subscribe
The protection of the natural environment
The dynamic development of the social assumptions, laws, and conviviance that construct the radical transparency paradigm.

The idea of radical transparency is diametrically opposite - though not opposed and often synched to the ultimate goals of those of privacy advocates. Central is the idea of free access to "personal" information. But melded to that element is the idea of private ownership of that publicly accessible information. The information can not be used freely to enhance economic or political profit or to harm or use the participant.

[edit] Examples

For two examples:

John Smith lives at 555 Main Street, Anytown, USA and his phone # is 555-1234. He is also diabetic. If you wanted to use that information to advertise your business or service, John Smith has the right to charge you for the right to solicit him. You do not have the right to send him mail, or phone him or in other ways use that information for profit freely.
John Smith is also an undocumented British citizen who distributes cocaine in his neighborhood and generated $44,000.00 in income for himself last year. INS, IRS, and law enforcement could not use that public accessible information to prosecute him, collect taxes, deport him, interrogate him, or in any way diminish his quality of life.

To imagine how this might work:

Suppose all claimed publicly accessible information were considered both "creative works of pure fiction" and "intellectual property" upon which those making it available, either the individual (hence "radical") or corporation ("traditional") had full copyright/trademark/patent/intellectual property protection and ownership.

In this way radical disclosure would extend and expand to individuals the protections currently extended and enjoyed by corporations, their boards and officers.