RESEARCH and SOFTWARE
Go to our free legal research search engine:
We also support https://duckduckgo.com/ this search engine protects cookies privacy.
What non personal data we collect within our free software LawAIviewer softtware:
We only collect legal questions asked if our artificial intelligent system does not hold that legal question. That question is then run through our artificial intelligent system to provide an answer and to update the system. Please only send questions that do not include any persons name or organisation name or any other personal information. If you wish to refer to any name just put X in place. For example: "X lost their benefit because they were late for a benefit appointment."
Please note we only provide the location in law where that information can be found, we do not interpret that information. Therefore if you need legal advice please go and see a Solicitor if however you cannot afford legal advice please feel free to use our standard version of our software.
We do not track who has downloaded our software or who may ask a legal question within the software. This is because we believe in absolute privacy.
Downloading our software should be safe. However always save to your download folder and use an antivirus to check. Microsoft edge browser may say the software is unsafe. Please just ignore and download it, is perfectly safe to use. If you have any question before downloading the software please contact me at email@example.com
LawAiNow is a small Welsh business so if you are a Solicitor, Business, Government Body or Educational Institution please support your local welsh business. We are basically competing against others like Westlaw, LexisNexis and others. We use Artificial Intelligence to provide the best possible legal research information.
How can we compete, we are not saying leave them and come to use. What we are saying is that they maybe charging thousands and we only charge £60.00 per year so if you are a big Solicitors or Business or Educational establishment using these services why not purchase ours also.
You may ask why, the answer is very simple no one system will ever give you all of the information. This is because computers can never provide all of the data for a single question. When you compare and contrast the data you get a better picture. Ask LexisNexis a legal question then ask our system the same legal question. See how they compare and contrast with each other this is the quickest way to get the best results fast. Sometimes they may both point your at the same information but importantly other times one of the two systems will provide different but still relevant information, for example secondary legislation or cases that the other system just missed.
Another reason is cost, some small firms just can not afford to pay the subscription for these bigger legal resources and just do as much ad hoc local research as possible without all of the big legal resources. Because we only charge £60.00 per year. This is nothing to even the smallest of solicitors.
New Dark Age of Surveillance - This Bill Must Be Stopped
This all started back in 2000 when the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 became legislation. Now we have the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill - see https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2783l , this is very likely going to become law with some frightening consequences.
What is concerning about this new bill is the amount of public authorities than can now commit a crime and no longer be held responsible. Yes I said it right they can now "Commit A Crime" and if they are doing surveillance get away with it.
You may think, that in certain circumstances where an MI5 officers life was in danger it maybe acceptable for the supreme court to state in exceptional circumstances that they had to do a criminal wrong to look as if they are part of a criminal group. But to put into legislation that committing a crime while at work is acceptable is going too far.
But we seem to be passing legislation that gives most public authorities permission to commit a crime. Will this be abused the simple answer is YES, human nature is usually one of, if we can get away with it we will.
AMNESTY SAY this new bill does not prevent torture.
MI5 - Understandable but let the courts decide.
Police Force and National Crime Agency - Amazing those who protect against crime can now commit a crime.
Immigration Officers - Simply Why
HRM Customs and Revenue - Ridiculous just unbelievable
UK Military - Why
Ministry of Justice (Relations to Prison) -Why
Lots more but to name just some - Environment Agency, Financial Conduct Authority, just to name some. Again Why.
If you have nothing to hide then you should not be concerned about privacy. This is a commonly used phrase, and one of the most dangerous phrases in existence. Privacy is a fundamental human right, which we have given away in law see the UK Investigatory Powers Act 2016 if you wish to see how much we have lost our privacy.
Now Public Authorities can bug your home, record video of you and your family including your children. walking around your house in whatever state of dress any family member maybe in. They can listen into your most private conversations with your wife, they can listen into your bedroom talk. They can easily see every thing you watch on television or YouTube or any digital communications, even if encrypted.
If you agree with the statement, if you have nothing to hide then you should not be concerned about privacy. Then therefore put several recording devices all around your home include video apart from the bathroom and then without any editing put it up on YouTube once a month for about 6 years. Then you will understand how someone feels who is under Surveillance.
What is even more interesting is that if you suspect that you are under Surveillance you really have no where to turn. A Court will not tell you if you are under Surveillance by a public authority.
You probably will never no what form of surveillance is carried out against you.
Changing the Law -
I am not apposed or against certain types of Surveillance. However I think some surveillance should just be banned all together. Surveillance while in your own home should be banned outright. No microphones no video just ban surveillance in someone's home. Trust me I know this is going on.
Put very strict time limits on surveillance.
The whole point of Surveillance is to collect evidence, for a criminal conviction. At trial all surveillance used should be admissible this should not exclude any surveillance, if so, that surveillance should not be used in court but the overall time of surveillance should be admissible in court.
If the person under surveillance was cleared of a crime he was under surveillance for he should be compensated and a written apology made by the public authority that had that person under surveillance.
If a person was under surveillance and that surveillance has ended for 12 months the person under surveillance should be compensated and a written letter of apology sent to him.
All contents of surveillance should be destroyed after 12 months of surveillance stopping.
Compensation should start at £5,000 pounds for each month that person was under surveillance. You may ask why so much, well apart from a total loss of privacy for a person under surveillance and their family. It would be a deterrent from any public authority to continue to use surveillance if they could not show that it would lead to a conviction.
My final point if anybody used surveillance against another person at some point they would find something that they have done that would cause a Civil or Criminal wrong. Even if it's driving over the 30 mile an our speed limit. If you had surveillance in your car you could possible be track enough times that when you have broken the speed limit so many times, to be disqualify from driving a car. This brings me back to my final point.
It is the people who are carrying out the surveillance who have all the power. Let us all rewrite the law on surveillance.
Please feel free to copy this page onto your web-site if you feel like me that Britain is becoming a surveillance state.