I wouldn't say that. Everybody is at least a little charming and manipulative, but that doesn't make everybody sociopaths. It's the lack of conscience and the focus on self-gratification.
So what is a person (or corporation) when they can clearly distinguish between right from wrong (has a conscience within their specific social context), but focuses on self gratification (or profit)?
I don't think being able to distinguish right and wrong is sufficient to say that somebody has a conscience. They also have to care. In particular, sociopaths are characterized by a lack of empathy and remorse, not by a lack of understanding.
Anyhow, if you tend a little in that direction, you're an asshole. A lot, and you're a sociopath. That's my view, anyhow.
Seeing this as your view, i think it is a fair assessment.
But there are some things that make me think a bit more:
[0]"They also have to care"
[1]"sociopaths are characterized by a lack of empathy and remorse"
To establish one's caring ability [0], does one have to explicitly state that they care (to the public), or can that be a judgement coming from the massess from "whatever" basis makes up the moral code of their society that had been established by a relative minority group of people over time (which sometimes constitutes the tyranny of the majority)?
And again with [1], is this a self characterization, or an external one?
From the examples above by you before, it seems like sociopaths are more than likely in a position of power that was given by a group of people. If so, what does that say about the group of people (or massess) that empower the sociopaths?