Follow-up to Detailed Analysis of Edward Snowden in the Context of Human Rights I recently published an article, entitled to be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/X3dB9rgq6kyBmJJ7RVU5/full#.Ur2Y8_sSirg, regarding what what human rights advocates can do for people like Edward Snowden, in the International Journal Of Human Rights. This article argues in favour of lobbying governments to change laws regarding such individuals, in the US and elsewhere. It also suggests that such groups be judicious in their choice of action, and use crowd-sourcing for financial help. In order to make that argument, this article examines whether existing whistleblower protections apply to people such as Snowden, and what the significance is of Snowden's revelations. The article was premised on whether Snowden qualified as a whistleblower, and was behaving as an underdog. There was evidence in support of his using underdog strategy, but I concluded that he did not qualify legally as a whistleblower. Events since the writing of the article has borne out these conclusions. On the question of whether Snowden is using underdog strategy: Snowden had the presence of mind to retain files that have been released piecemeal since, and led to tensions among allied nations about spying, the US, Brazil and Germany being the most prominent. My article had concluded on early evidence that Snowden was seeking to create a bargaining chip. These developments, and his plain offer to Brazil of more files in exchange for asylum, confirm it. Happily for him, he retains his sense of accomplishment. “For me, in terms of personal satisfaction, the mission’s already accomplished,” he told the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/edward-snowden-after-months-of-nsa-revelations-says-his-missions-accomplished/2013/12/23/49fc36de-6c1c-11e3-a523-fe73f0ff6b8d_story.html?hpid=z1). Although it is too early to tell, and it may be impossible to confirm, it is just possible that the ongoing leaks by Snowden are calculated to create pressure on the US by allies concerned about future revelations. The discussion of Snowden's possible amnesty, the comments of Buller, the outrage of Merkel and Rousseff all point in this direction, but any conclusions are premature. On the significance of his actions, despite not being a whistleblower: The furore over his actions continue to exercize various secret services, including the former head of MI5, Eliza Manningham Buller (http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7d3cf2ba-6ef4-11e3-bc9e-00144feabdc0.html). This can also be concluded from the US's desire to have Snowden returned, as well as the government's efforts on providing media with stories favorable to its position (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25500751). The US government also rejected any possibility of an amnesty for Snowden. Eight firms, Yahoo, AOL, Google, Facebook, Linkedin, Apple, Microsoft and Twitter, haves formed an alliance asking for reform of surveillance laws (http://reformgovernmentsurveillance.com/). The companies believe that it is time for the world’s governments to address the practices and laws regulating government surveillance of individuals and access to their information. The US President's Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies issued a number of recommendations (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2013-12-12_rg_final_report.pdf). The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution aimed at protecting the right to privacy of internet users (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-25441408). The resolution was introduced by Brazil and Germany after allegations that the US had been eavesdropping on foreign leaders, including Brazil's Dilma Rousseff and Germany's Angela Merkel. The resolution, which can be read at http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/21/un-draft-resolution-privacy-right was co-sponsored by 55 countries, is not binding but carries political and moral weight. A US Federal District judge declared the NSA's surveillance unconstitutional (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25410949), giving rise to several major editorials. There were calls for a shift in capitalism in the Financial Times, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d2af6426-696d-11e3-aba3-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2ogrkG9Vs; calls on the NSA to justify its actions better in the Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nsa-must-disclose-more-to-make-its-case/2013/12/16/762fcef2-66a2-11e3-a0b9-249bbb34602c_story.html; empahsizing the end of the 34-year old precedent, known as the mosaic theory, in surveillance in the US, in the Wall Street Journal, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/12/16/judge-leon-tosses-aside-an-old-government-standby; noting the shake-up in Washington as a result of the judgment in the New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/17/us/politics/judge-has-never-let-presidents-off-easy-on-pornography-terrorism-or-surveillance.html?ref=us&_r=1&; ) The recommendations for human rights advocates are still valid in the light of this latest information.