Headline Dec 10, 2014/

''' TAKING CUTS FROM LEGAL 

JUDGEMENTS !? '''

FROM ME -TO THOUSANDS OF YOU  -''many thanks for your kind sentiments and pledges:

!WOW!   -the World Students Society Computers-Internet-Wireless is the ownership of every single student in the world:

One Share-piece-peace for every student in the world''. And now the post. 

Burford, though a year younger, is bigger than Juridica, and funds a wide spectrum of cases.

It boasts a 61% net return on invested capital in 2012.

Christopher Bogart, its co-founder and boss, says chief financial officers understand when he describes  lawsuits  as assets: 

''I am not talking about doing anything different than litigation then they're talking about doing with photocopiers and aeroplanes.''

Some worry that funding others'  lawsuit is unethical. A common law prohibition against  ''maintenance''  and  ''champerty''  used to forbid outsiders from meddling in lawsuits and taking cuts from judgements. But such rules have loosened.

I repeat, what I wrote earlier : Lord Jackson, a former judhe asked by the British government to review civic law costs, has praised outside funding.

America, with its astronomical legal costs, has other worries. Robert Weber, IBM's general counsel,  wrote in February, last year, that third-party funding was ''the latest gimmick in a headlong rush to degrade legal professionalism.''

America's Chamber of Commerce, a business lobby, fears that funding will encourage junk lawsuits.

HOW WILL WE KNOW that the damage to anyone's public reputation, occurred because of abuse of information collected through a warrant? 

This is a highly pertinent question since the granting of warrants is an entire secret process.

A review committee composed of Federal Ministers of Law , Interior and Defence is also provided by the FTA ,  2013, to meet on a bi-annual basis. Their job is to review the efficacy of warrants-

And the relevant progress made in preventing terrorism. However, their proceedings shall remain secret as well.

While the citizens are at the mercy of snooping by the state, they have no judicial recourse  under the  FTA 2013,  unless they know of abuse.

And we all know that by the time abuse of information occurs, it is often too late in the day to salvage reputations.

The enactment of this law should not make anyone think that surveillance of our communications was not taking place before this law.

The Telecom Re-organization Act  1996  gave wide powers of surveillance to the state   -without, any involvement by the judiciary.

That power still persists and is supplemented by the FTA 2013.

The only difference now is,  and this no small victory for the legislature, that the law actuality governs the conduct of  intelligence agencies if they want to engage in surveillance.

The Honour and Serving of the operational research continues. Thank you for reading, and maybe learning. And see you on the next one.

With respectful dedication to Lawyer Barrack Obama, President of the United States of America.

With respectful dedication to the Students of the world. See Ya all on !WOW! -the World Students Society Computers-Internet-Wireless:

''' The Rise Of Privacy '''

'''Good Night and God Bless

SAM Daily Times - the Voice of the Voiceless