My question involves business law in the state of: United States
I am a college student and I am currently completing come coursework in which I have chosen to look into the evolution of corporate law and its social impact. I have learned that the principle of person-hood permits corporations to own property nonessential or unrelated to its primary economic activities, as they were not while governed by charters. My inquiry is about whether or not it is legal or even possible for this to allow for certain conflicts of interest.
Real life example of a scenario where this would relevant: an individual is a contract farmer for a corporation. The corporation communicates to the this individual their preference that they adopt a specific technology in their production and does not offer any financial assistance for them to do so.
Based on my current understanding of what person-hood enables a corporation to do, one is permitted to own property that can include other corporations and companies. Thus, it would seem that a contracting corporation would have the right to also own the producer of the hypothetical technology. Now obviously something is amiss here if that is ture. Is this possible/legal? To me this is blatant conflict of interest, but it seems that the current structure of things would permit it. Am I at all correct in any of this?
EDIT: Also, is it possible for a corporation as an entity to obtain a patent sans person-hood?