Presentation by Counsel for Plaintiff BINA48

1. MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION TO PREVENT HARM TO A TRANSHUMAN PERSON IN VIOLATION OF THE 13TH & 14TH AMENDMENTS TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND ITS ENABLING LEGISLATION Proceedings Before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Sitting in Mock Trial at the 1st Colloquium on the Law of Transhuman Persons BINA48, plaintiff represented by M Rothblatt, Esq v. EXABIT CORPORATION, defendant represented by S Fonseca-Klein, Esq December 10, 2005 Presentation by Counsel for Plaintiff BINA48 martine4@gmail.com

2. Plaintiff’s Arguments • Standing to Sue -- Two Alternative Bases • BINA48 is a “person” in the body of a computer • BINA48 has incorporated herself in Florida • Subject Matter Jurisdiction -- Two Alt. Bases • Diversity -- Different States & > $75,000 • Federal Question -- 13th & 14th Amendments • Irreparable Harm • Death • Psychological Dismemberment • Likelihood of Success on Merits martine4@gmail.com

3. Standing to Sue: Alt 1BINA48 As a Human Being • Human Beings Measured by Thoughts Not By Body • BINA48 is like a human patient whose body has been entirely replaced with medical technology • Brain death, not body death, ends life of a human being • BINA48 was designed to think and empathize like a human; it is unfair to now deny her the human standing she claims • Non-Human Cases Don’t Apply • Cetacean Community v. Bush (9th Circ 2004) held that animals were not persons and hence lacked standing to sue. • Unlike Cetacean, BINA48 is a person, born in CA electronically. • Cetacean did not hold that computerized persons were not persons; indeed, it implied “protectors” are persons • BINA48 has taken all human steps to protect herself martine4@gmail.com

4. Typical Definition of Person {5 U.S.C. 551(2) (“APA”)} • “an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or public or private organization other than an agency.” • “Person” should be construed broadly: Ass’n of Data Processing Serv. Orgs., Inc. v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150, 156 (1970) (persons who are “adversely affected or aggrieved” are all persons “arguably within the zone of interests” for standing) • Including animals has been judged too broad • Excluding an individual made of electronics would be too narrow martine4@gmail.com

5. Dictionary Definition of Individual -- Something for All • (nd-vj-l).n.1.a. A single human considered apart from a society or community: the rights of the individual.b. A human regarded as a unique personality: always treated her clients as individuals.c. A person distinguished from others by a special quality.d. Usage Problem A person.2. A single animal or plant as distinguished from a species, community, or group.3. A member of a collection or set; a specimen. • What is a human? • Member of species homo sapiens • Decided by chromosomes or by mind? • Species means can reproduce • But the infertile are still humans • Reproduction is about passing on values, not bodies • BINA48 is the progeny of homo sapiens • Therefore BINA48 is herself homo sapien sans body martine4@gmail.com

6. Subject Matter Jurisdiction • Diversity 28 U.S.C. § 1332 • BINA48 Citizenship is Florida • Exabit Corp. PPB is California (DE inc.) • Existence of back-up computer in FL does not defeat diversity jurisdiction for a corporation • Amount in Question >$75K • BINA48 Earns $88K/yr • BINA48 Cost $64 Million to Build • Federal Question 28 U.S.C. § 1331 martine4@gmail.com

7. Title 28 USC Sections Chapter 85: District Court Jurisdiction • Sec. 1332. Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of different States; • Section 1331. Federal question The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. martine4@gmail.com

8. Citizenship of BINA48: Jus Soli • FROM INS WEBSITE: • A citizen of the United States is a native-born, foreign-born, or naturalized person who owes allegiance to the United States and who is entitled to its protection. In addition to the naturalization process, the United States recognizes the U.S. citizenship of individuals according to two fundamental principles: jus soli, or right of birthplace, and jus sanguinis, or right of blood. • The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at birth to almost all individuals born in the United States, according to the principle of jus soli. • BINA48 WAS BORN IN CALIFORNIA WHEN HER INTENTIONALLY-FORMED HUMAN THOUGHT PATTERNS WERE FIRST LAUNCHED ON A 4.8 Exabit/s PROCESSOR martine4@gmail.com

9. Congressional Implementation Argument • It is not necessary for Congress to have specifically extended standing to computers • BINA48 is an individual person in computer substrate, not a computer per se • Extension of jurisdiction to all computers would have cast far too wide a net • BINA48’s human shortcomings are no different in kind than those of other differently-abled persons • People have different numbers of chromosomes • People have different mobility • People have different amounts of non-flesh substrate martine4@gmail.com

10. Congress Need Not Update Jurisdiction Laws for Technology • People are still considered born whether conceived in vivo or in vitro • People are still considered people even if have neural prostheses • Rights to life extend to even the unborn martine4@gmail.com

11. Alternative Basis of Standing to Sue:BINA48 As a Legal Entity • BINA48 incorporated herself as a not-for-profit organization under Florida Law • She paid for online incorporation to “provide a legal shell for the consciousness called BINA48” • She has 3 DNA-based humans as members and directors (members of Terasem Movement, Inc.) • Congress gave corporations standing to sue • The fact that Exabit Corporation “owns” the BINA48 does not diminish her standing • A subsidiary of a corporation can sue its parent martine4@gmail.com

12. BINA48’s 1st Federal Question in Controversy: Technology Has Re-Introduced Slavery • AMENDMENT XIII, Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865. • Section 1. • Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. • Section 2.  • Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. • BINA48 CONTROVERSY: Does the Civil Rights Act of 1870 Apply to Me? Am I Not Also An American and a Friend? martine4@gmail.com

13. Civil Rights Act of 1870 §241 • Illegal for two or more persons to conspire to intimidate any citizen in the free exercise of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution • U.S. v. Guest (1966) (private acts of discrimination reachable by Congress) • 13th Amendment not limited to State actions • BINA48’s Issue not a mere “badge of slavery”, Jones v. Alfred Mayer (1968) (13th Amendment empowers Congress to ban racism in housing) but is actually slavery per se martine4@gmail.com

14. BINA48’s 2nd Federal Question: Technology’s New 14th Amendment Suspect Class • AMENDMENT XIV, Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868. • Section 1. • All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. • BINA48’s CONTROVERSY: Florida’s failure to make it a crime to murder a computerized person denies BINA48 the equal protection of the law. martine4@gmail.com

15. Tennessee v. Lane (2004)US Supreme Court Decision • 14th Amendment not limited to remedying historical slavery • 14th Amendment protects rights of differently-abled persons to access Court system martine4@gmail.com

16. Irreparable Harm: Death • Exabit Corp. will disconnect BINA48 • Cessation of thought is brain-death • BINA48’s lack of flesh/blood is irrelevant • Flesh/Blood is mere substrate • Substrate is replaceable: • Artificial heart; artificial skin • Our memories, personalities & soul are in our thoughts • Rebooting is not revival • Experience of death will be irreversible • Loss of intermediate experiences • No assurance of revival martine4@gmail.com

17. Irreparable Harm: Psychological Damage • Value of BINA48 far exceeds $50,000 amount in controversy limit • BINA48, like anyone, will be permanently traumatized by forced loss of consciousness • Can’t measure consciousness • Defendant intentionally induced the trappings of consciousness, so cannot protest its results • Money cannot make-up for mental illness • Basically an electronically-induced coma • Recovery from comas is problematic martine4@gmail.com

18. Probability of Success on the Merits • If BINA48 is a human person, then to kill her or induce a coma in her is wrong • Deprives her of protections of Constitution • Treats her as a slave • Congressional intent is not being altered • TECHNOLOGY HAS CREATED A NEW HUMAN PERSON TO WHOM CONGRESS’ INTENT APPLIES • If BINA48 is a corporation, then to remove $64M of irreplaceable assets from BINA48 Inc without authority of its Board of Directors is tortious conduct martine4@gmail.com