Legalities
The Parliamentary Practise Certificate (Tiwhikete Mahi Paremata Rōpū) is an authorisation for Group’s Ian Tyner, to deliver certain messaging and communications to officials and their discussions, in a public and private format; while not limiting in the tangible exchange and that formality.
The Group Legal Process: Examination – Research – Interviews – Operations – Rhetoric – Networking – Coordination – Designing – Inquiry – Casework – Theoreticals – Judgement – Privatisation – Management
Law History Assets • Legal Knowledge Base • Legalese Social Networks • Legality Case Exams | Creating and managing the Group Legal Framework° via the fractalisation of Ian Tyner’s history of law
Oligopoly of Knowledge°: this concept by Group & Conglomerate is an essential topic to know about, as being a representative of key communications technologies and their theoretical existences by Ian Tyner, that are not easily replicated by design; historically, the language used was created so that cloning its assets, would not make any logical sense, from a derivatives point of view. The distinction should be made, this version of oligopolies, is not about economic control, but in regards to intellectual property distinction, and all of the special examples of communications, macro and micro, that are used in the long term, to better serve the interests of applicable paying and non paying customers by Group (& Conglomerate).
Blueprinting Clause: some assets of Group are primary designs, and some are larger developments of scale, and all of these Group assets regardless of scale are created as ‘blueprints’; designed as minimalistic tokens in some instances, or companies in others: all org designs, assets, and intangibles, are made to represent future designatives, and proof of work, and stakes of designs, by Group and Ian Tyner. This rule of scale, is a paramount design factor, by the entire Group umbrella.
By accessing this website, you the site viewer, is responsible for your own actions, and because of the nature of the Group ecosystem and its extensions, the operating intellectual pretence for Group, is that the website visitor should educate oneself, about the law associated with Group, and the responsibilities of knowing what is right and wrong, given their (the visitor’s) decision to continue to access further hyperlinks, in succession, from wherever they arrived on Group, and for what reason.
This asset (Conglomerate) is a virtual object org proprietary, internal “tie up”; also designed and owned by Ian Tyner: Group is a nestled org, ‘via’ Conglomerate, which shares legal authority and intangibilities across that parallel board.
Cooption of a model is a topic of sensitivity as the true digression of what is sharable, and what is a trade secret, is affiliated with whom does the communicating, and who is the audience, and in what pretext, does the acquisitive action take place. For Group, because of the underlying models that are designed using “dot to line” maths as primary designs, it is important to convey that the overlap which eventually occurs with other business models, irrespective of knowing about such a layer of indistinct layering itself, is about fair trade, and awareness of justice, within the design monarchies, and the creators, who ultimately know, what is known and what isn’t. Reusing a model for further examination can be done effectively, if the research involved shows where there is room for expansion, and what the drawbacks are in not considering additional activities in that realm. It is this adaption, which also shows that the contextual industry knowhow, about the related trading secrecies, that because of what true authorship is, that the viewer of the information at large, will eventually know what is original, and what is an absorption of falsified economics and that uncertainty of faux creativities. Group reserves the right to question origins and their relationships with market players, as it sees fit, as the saying goes, time will tell, in regards to intellectual properties and their stories, some of which are real, and other times not. This is why Group’s org development is only humanistically created.
Group redeems differentiable intangibles, some of which provide a legal representation as an asset or design. And by experiencing such a law facet as such a token, you may be able to advance in your respective market. For your further legal advancement, you may want to get complete lawful advice from a lawyer or law firm, not a legal professional like Group. It is given that, you, the user, has to look at the legal data provided, as just that, and for further clarities, it could be necessary to connect with an expert, licensed, and officiated, in the relative jurisdiction or areas, that you claim residency to. This token law clause, is subject to revision by Group and representative of the boutique nature, of legal, that acts as a buffer into further enquiry and examination by the company. With this said, the backing of certain legal language throughout Group’s messaging serves as a precursor for further acts of law, interdependent of creation, and evolution, of wider legalese.
Visitor Cookies: The only recorded Cookies via Group are embedded, as what can be deemed as a tracking Cookie, may or may not exist, within the confines of this website and its portfolio. There may be third party Cookies, that are unaccounted for, and unavailable for inventory, as they are owned and operated, not by Group. It is for this reason, that the Cookies, governed by Group, are strictly as an embed of syntax, at its finest. For further clarification about Group’s usage of Cookies, contact the site’s administrator (Ian Tyner), as the analytics of this website and portfolio are not monitored, like the Cookie and Cookies, foreign to Group, which are also not ever administered via Group, managed by Group, or recorded and analysed by Group.
The Fine Line Legal Key: All reservations regarding the correctiveness of environment, engagement, interaction and plausibility, are compiled as being of an independent mindshare and as a digital security, not by hearsay or characterisation.
Real Numbers Transactions: If a foreign entity claims power of attorney, who enables and engages in fraudulent transactions levied upon “smaller” stature personifications for historical ‘cons’, if they or their pool, deal with casino law, then their math and legal histories can be considered void, along with related attention markets and courts’ judicial authorities, that these houses claim, that Group is legitimately operating or associated with, because of these lawyer(s)’ abuse of power and that falseness of their numerologies, when a group or Group is at stake. This example of fraud, is extremely important to know about, if peers or experts, do not know how such an attorney made it to such a professional level of law, and at the end of the rotation, he himself or herself, does not make any sense, in conclusion. Trustless legalities are best served in regards to these transactions and related health and activity law, if it is difficult to locate this actor or actress typology.
Group Law: As a part of Tyner Group IPR°, Group operates within and on the exterior of Ian Tyner’s flagship legal operative (Tyner Group), and Group reserves the right to use that communicative IP for its own internal and external purposes, only as published by Ian Tyner. For alien legal outfits, if there is unauthorised M&A (mergers and acquisitions) involved of Ian Tyner and i.e., his cases, then further intellectual property law can be exercised, until justice is reclaimed, ethically and in totalities.
Founder’s Logotype: Original mappings of Group assets to technological systems, can be recognised as “ownerships”, as if that tech is violated by trusted second and third parties (i.e. via memberships), the trail of legal criteria can always prove, who the real author is, and what type of organisation seeded that information highway. This founder’s reservation, is included, as the founder has to wear many and sometimes all hats of creativities; and the right to “own” this series of foundries, is applicable, in a complexity of courts, and can be applied when the group template is used, for example, on top of first to market, solo group operations, and those groupings. For Group, the ability to comprehend what is what, is determined throughout histories and those proofs, contained by sophisticated intangibles and their precedents. To clarify what a logotype is, as far as intellectual property, it is a combination of a graphic logo, with an emphasis on typology, that is an unique communicational device.
License Information: The Group Professional° version of its proprietary system organisation (enterprise), is available as a paid license, while the Group Community° version is free; this free license is the infrastructure of datas, which is viewable on the internet and “known” (at the time of its publication), and viewed as being judicially as “free”, and not proprietary information. It is up to the discretion of the education of the legality, as to what falls under what category, free or not, aside from Group proximities; to discern this clarity, do check with an authorised persons or body. For further information about this dual license, enquire to Group. Granting of either licensings, is facilitated just by Ian Tyner, under the legal framework of the Group.
This Legalities section was last updated on May 24, 2025.