Selling Term Papers is Illegal in 17 states?

I have read recently that 17 states have made it illegal to "sell research material knowing or having reason to believe that it will be submitted for academic credit" and similar descriptions. We always hear that it is illegal and criminal etc.... but, I can not find a compressive list of these states anywhere? Can the collective of "intellectuals" and "researches" here on the forum find the time to stop name calling long enough to put together a list of these states? Or feel free to slander while building the list!

I already posted that information. Essay sites, in and of themselves, are not illegal.

Has a customer ever sued an essay writing site?

"research purposes only" - if you read the terms, all of the essay writing services have put it in their disclosures. They are covered as they should be.

Yes, Blue Macellari successfully sued in August of 2005.

HINT: This lawsuit would be quite handy as precedent against essaywriters.net's double-dealing through MightyStudents.com and EssayMill.com.

By the way, asking for a student's school and/or course is very likely-in and of itself-breaking the laws that govern the industry in most states.

agreed

Wow, I'm endangering an entire industry! Mom always said I'd go far!

writers2beware: Can you link me to a post where you outline what laws bar my operation? Please? I've asked several times, and you keep saying they exist, but have yet to even link me to another post. If you wish to prove me wrong, I can do no better than this invitation to demonstrate that fact.

Your ignorance is staggering. Tell me, Mr. Know-it-all, do you think that when a university or district attorney decides-once again-to take up the cause of "fighting academic fraud" that the lawsuit will name only the company that originally caught the plaintiff's attention? Good luck with that. You may want to reference the Boston University lawsuit of 1995.

YOU are the one who is repeatedly side-stepping my challenge. Sorry, but if I'm going to waste my time EDUCATING you and REPEATING myself, you're going to have to reiterate-for the record-your position that I am wrong, you are not breaking any laws, and no applicable laws exist.

If my ignorance is so staggering, please take my invitation to educate me. I am sincere, not simply looking to argue. In my years in this industry, I have yet to discover any laws making this business illegal, and given my knowledge of the law, I strongly believe this business is completely legal. Why I needed to say that yet again, I don't know but hopefully it's enough for you to simply link me your other comments where you outline what laws make this illegal. I tried searching your comment history, but most of what I saw was other arguments with other people, including quite a number from a "queen sheba" who seems to be even less accommodating than you are. If I'm such a danger, then please take a moment to clarify exactly what laws make me wrong. I'm not your enemy, I don't even know you, but if you want me to learn from you, you need to provide me with some evidence.

this isn't a site for free legal research. your site is definitely breaking laws.

Providing research assistance is legal. What you are advertising is blatantly ILLEGAL.

It is a crime to knowingly enable students to engage in academic fraud by submitting your writing-as their own work-for academic credit. You may not:

* suggest, in any way, that a customer may directly submit a paper for academic credit;

* guarantee a particular grade;

* offer to write in a manner/style that will "fool" a teacher/professor;

* state that a student's teacher/professor will not "find out";

* suggest that your service is a "shortcut" for a student's academic requirements (or to graduation);

* offer "ghostwriting" (ghostwriting is expressly banned and illegal for academic works);

* offer to transfer copyright to the customer (you may legally sell your time/labor/research/expertise, NOT a physical/virtual, written work that would obviously require copyright ownership in order to turn in for academic credit; fraudulent companies offer copyright ownership for that precise reason);

* offer to take exams for a student;

* ask for a customer's school/course information;

* place "blank lines" at the top of a document so that the student may fill-in his or her name, professor's name, course, and/or academic institution.

---------------------------------------------

Here are some of the laws:

California

law.justia.com/codes/california/2007/edc/66400-66406.7.html
law.justia.com/codes/california/2005/edc/66400-66406.html
codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/EDC/3/d5/40/6/s66400

Connecticut

law.justia.com/codes/connecticut/2005/title53/sec53-392b.html
law.justia.com/codes/connecticut/2011/title53/chap949b/Sec53-392b.html
law.justia.com/codes/connecticut/2011/title53/chap949b/Sec53-392a.html
legaltips.org/connecticut/Chap949b.aspx#Sec53-392b.aspx

Florida

law.justia.com/codes/florida/2011/titlexlvi/chapter877/section877.17/
law.onecle.com/florida/crimes/877.17.html

Illinois

law.justia.com/codes/illinois/2005/chapter18/1052.html
law.justia.com/codes/illinois/2012/chapter-110/act-110-ilcs-5/

Oregon

law.justia.com/codes/oregon/2009/165.html

Maine

law.justia.com/codes/maine/2005/title17-ach0sec0/title17-asec705.html
mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/17-a/title17-Asec705.html

Maryland

law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2005/ged/26-201.html

Massachusetts

law.justia.com/codes/illinois/2005/chapter18/1052.html
malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter271/Section50
law.onecle.com/massachusetts/271/50.html

Nevada

law.justia.com/codes/nevada/2010/title15/chapter207/nrs207-320.html
law.onecle.com/nevada/crimes/207.320.html
leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-207.html#NRS207Sec320

New Jersey

law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2009/title-18a/section-18a-2/18a-2-3/
law.onecle.com/new-jersey/18a-education/2-3.html

New York

law.onecle.com/new-york/education/EDN0213-B_213-B.html

North Carolina

law.justia.com/codes/north-carolina/2010/chapter14/article20/section14-1182
law.justia.com/codes/north-carolina/2005/chapter_14/gs_14-118.2.html

Pennsylvania

law.justia.com/codes/pennsylvania/2010/title-18/chapter-73/7324/

Texas

law.onecle.com/texas/penal/32.50.00.html
law.justia.com/codes/texas/2005/pe/007.00.000032.00.html
law.justia.com/codes/texas/2009/penal-code/title-7-offenses-against-property/chapter-32-fraud/

Virginia

law.justia.com/codes/virginia/2006/toc1802000/18.2-505.html

Washington

law.justia.com/codes/washington/2005/title28b/28b.10.580.html
law.justia.com/codes/washington/2005/title28b/28b.10.584.html

Does anyone know of these statutes being enforced/prosecuted, now or ever? I know about BU but I am talking about all these specific state laws.

In states with no specific laws, could more general statutes be applied?

I'm sure that I could dig up laws in other states if I really tried to do so, but it's not necessary. My intent is to prove that-contrary to Don's claims-such laws do, in fact, exist and termpapercustom.com is clearly breaking them. Considering that "Don" uses a Walnut Creek area code on his site, I'm going to assume that he also lives in California. As such, he is directly bound by the laws of California, his home state.

It is important to note that a plaintiff in New York (or any other state in which an applicable law exists) can establish that an out-of-state company (in California, for example) is bound by his/her state's laws simply by proving that the company in question has improperly sold papers/services to any person in his/her state.

Well Don is a doofus who needs to learn to type "essay mill" into Wikipedia. But I'm wondering if there is any known enforcement/prosecution/litigation under the statutes. Again, I'm aware of BU but am not talking about that.

I have not dedicated any research time to that, but you touch on precisely what I am trying to communicate to Don. It is highly unlikely that a plaintiff who is willing to move forward with a lawsuit will do so against only one company. As with the BU case, any lawsuit will be a blanket attempt to take down all significant sites/companies in the industry (just as in 1995).

This is my final reply, as I'm really tired of your insults. Here's the relevant section for essay mill: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay_mill#Legal_status

And, it's actually incorrect, or at best incomplete. First, it states the practice is not illegal, so thanks for calling me a doofus then pointing me to a document that agreed with me. Second, WE (I can't speak for other companies) actually operate as work-for-hire writers, which under copyright law makes the customer the holder of copyright.

Lastly, I thank you for those links to the various laws in a number of states. It looks like in several states it's a civil infraction, as opposed to criminal, which is an interesting line to draw by their legislatures. I can only imagine how rare actual enforcement is. That said, you're completely correct and I was wrong, and I thank you for the pointers. However I lament that it took such a contentious and derisive conversation to goad you into simply backing up your assertion. I wish you simply could have pointed those links out earlier on, rather than taking post after post simply to express insults and mockery. I would ask you to explain how I'm endangering an industry that appears to be unlawful in several states any more than any other company is, but I'm afraid I have neither the patience nor desire to go through five or six more rounds of vehemence from you. Aside from a single post with those links, you never attempted to explain anything to me, you simply launched personal attack after insult. Your view of your own behavior is suspect at best.

As it happens, I'm not in any of those states, so I'm not going to worry too much. Even if a state AG from any of those states decided to tilt at windmills, it would be difficult at best to demonstrate either jurisdiction or standing. Thank you for the information, though.

Are your comprehension skills as poor as your research skills? You don't recognize any of your practices contained within the above list of "example violations"? Legitimate, law-abiding companies do not do any of those things.


Delusional much? Once again, all it takes to establish jurisdiction is proof that you have completed ANY transactions with ANY person (doesn't have to be the plaintiff) in the plaintiff's state.

Don, now that it's on public record that you are completely aware of the laws that regulate your business (and have openly suggested that you plan to continue to knowingly violate those laws), I highly suggest that you immediately clean up your violating copy or I may have to place a few phone calls.


That aspect of copyright law does NOT apply to academic works for hire. The laws listed on this page trump copyright law. Wake up.

No state law trumps federal law, ever. You clearly haven't the faintest clue what you're talking about, as your first response is always an insult. I've extended olive branch after olive branch, and you keep responding with vitriol. I almost feel bad for you in your daily life, to be so hateful all the time. Almost.

"Trump" is probably not the right word. The copyright laws are just completely unrelated. The academic-works laws apply independently of who owns the copyright. You can own, or buy, or sell the copyright to any number of things, such as plans for a bomb, pr0nography, a libelous article, and probably even a template that looks like a dollar bill. The copyright doesn't make any of those items any more or less legal.

don thought he was smart

Let me explain myself-and the legal reasoning-once again. The laws clearly state that a seller is guilty if-in the Court's opinion-he/she "reasonably should have known" that the work would be submitted for academic credit. Using copyright transfer as a sales gimmick is an obvious attempt to communicate to students that they can submit the papers for academic credit. At the very least, it lets students know that the company will in no way attempt to prevent students from committing academic fraud. Either way, advertising copyright transfer crosses the "reasonably should have known" threshold.


Regarding "trump," 99Essays is correct in that I probably should have chosen a more accurate term. What I mean is that no judge in a given state court is going to throw out the State's own lawsuit against you just because you present a "Federal Copyright Law" defense. Sorry, not gonna happen. The judge will review the wording on your site and your comments in this forum. He/She will immediately recognize that you are an unapologetic person who openly mocks and challenges the laws of his/her state. Given the fact that you are also knowingly/intentionally corrupting minors and the beloved educational system, you don't stand a chance. Sure, you can challenge the ruling, but I suggest that you start saving your pennies now. Lawyers aren't cheap.

You don't learn, do you, Don? What happened the last time that you ignorantly accused me of being incorrect?


You "extending an olive branch" suggests that we're two people on equal moral footing who argued about a legally and morally neutral topic, such as the NBA playoffs. That's not the case. You openly challenge/mock state laws and intentionally corrupt our educational system. So, you can keep your olives AND your branches.


Isn't it funny how crooks, liars, law-breakers, morons, etc. almost always default to that silly, pointless assumption about my personal life after I expose them? NEWSFLASH: This is a forum that focuses on uncovering scams. I don't come here to play nice and make friends. I come here to post evidence and stop lawbreakers.

My issue was more with the way Don used it, as if they're competing sets of laws and the federal copyright law beats the state laws on academic works. First of all, the statement is incorrect on its face. In any given legal area, state law can be stricter than federal law, and in those cases state law "trumps" federal law. In this particular case, however, they are simply two separate bodies of law. In a casual sense, it's not inaccurate to say the state academic laws "trump" the copyright laws in the sense that the state laws are the ones you need to follow and the copyright laws are fairly irrelevant. But the statement "No state law trumps federal law, ever" is hogwash.

It's actually not. As you said, state law can be stricter than federal and the reverse, but if the federal law contradicts a state law, the state law is invalid. This is a core tenet of a federal system. Today's marijuana laws in states like Washington and Colorado are great examples. While those states now allow recreational use, federal law still prohibits it, and they can still be prosecuted in Federal court regardless of the state law. Sodomy is another example, where may states prohibit it, but thanks to Lawrence v. Texas, those laws are unconstitutional and unenforceable. This is the basis for my statement that Federal law always wins out, the implied scenario being that Federal law and State law were at odds. If X is legal federally but illegal in a state, the state law is upheld in that state. Fireworks are legal in some states, not in others. That is a situation where the federal and state laws are not in conflict.

That said, I made it abundantly clear that my copyright statement was how we assign the copyrights to our customers under work-for-hire rules of copyright. At no point was that asserted as a defense for anything. The copyright issues and academic issues are indeed separate, and do not interfere with each other. With today's byzantine licensing of IP, it is entirely possible for a student to adhere to every academic integrity rule and still violate copyright, or to break every single academic integrity rule and still be completely within the law with respect to copyright. They do not somehow interlock.

Hey, Donny, to prove your little theory that federal copyright law will take precedence, please start by explaining why it didn't work in 1995 (when the existing state laws were weaker than they are today).

Thank you so much for this list! Very helpful.

~ Gina

Why would it be illegal to sell a term paper? The fraud rests with the person who tries to pass the work off as their own either for publication or academic credit. In east Asia, buying term papers and committing outright plagiarism are barely blips on the radar - different cultures and world view. Many universities know about this kind of cheating and do almost nothing to stop or prevent students from engaging in such practices.

It sort of alludes to a teacher punishing the student who let others copy his work more than the students who copied it.

They can say whatever they want to make it seem like they are keeping the educational system clean. Just like Varsity Blues. The reality is, the business is an open secret and they have been trying for decades to shut us down to no avail. For as long as the system overworks the students, there will be companies and writers like us to assist them and help them get a breather.

This is correct. Transfer of copyright has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of knowingly providing work intended to be used for the purposes covered by those criminal statutes.

Academic laws in those states have already criminalised, penalized students who buy term papers along with the independent writers or writing companies. Regardless of the copyright, the crime of academic dishonesty and / or contract cheating will not and cannot be erased. Schools now take appropriate action in such proven instances. Do not mislead the students into thinking that it is alright to violate any laws. Specially when clear laws covering specific violations exist.