Does this site do oxymoron(ism)?

Do we expect any better? No. This is how WritersBeware operates. When completely humiliated, she just pretends like she won and just keeps on repeating it (without any evidence and sticking hopelessly to her obviously and solidly proven flawed no sale = no case response).

It's only fair that my response be just as repetitive, though much more substantive.

A company that hires American writers can't win a libel case against wewriteessays.com because wewriteessays.com did not write a libelous statement against them. The libelous claim was against Americans in general as writers. So no go there.

What competitors can instead file is a false advertising claim under the product disparagement type. That is,

Product disparagement involves discrediting a competitor's product. The 1988 amendment to the Lanham Act extends claims for false advertising to misrepresentations about another's products.

law.jrank.org/pages/6729/False-Advertising-Types-False-Advertising.html

Thus, a competitor can hold wewriteessays.com liable under the Lanham Act for falsely advertising against them. As with all the other Lanham Act cases, there is no need to prove that a single sale was ever made by the accused. However, this fact is much more highlighted when it comes to the product disparagement type of Lanham Act cases.


I'm not pleading with anyone. I'm challenging them to agree with you, which they can't seem to bring themselves to do. You know why? Because doing so would be forum suicide. If they agreed with you on your "no sale=no case" argument, they'd be affirming that their stupidity is a match to yours. I don't think that your "friends" are stupid. Sucks to be you. ^_____________^

Based on your incredibly ignorant assertions, you clearly have no real-world experience in a US federal court of law, litigating matters related to defamation, libel, false adverting, or the Lanham Act. Am I wrong?

I'm not going to continue to go around in circles with you, ya desperate freak.

Let's say that you are correct in ANY of your assertions (which you are not).

Who cares? NOBODY.

Have you made a positive contribution to the forum? NOPE.

Have you in any way protected consumers? NOPE.

Do I care about any personal propaganda that you will surely claim to have established against me? NOPE.

Have you in any way whatsoever disproved ANY of my claims about ANY of the sites/companies that I have addressed in ANY of my threads/posts? NOPE.

What have you accomplished? NOTHING.

CONGRATS! Have a cookie, retard.

More worthless banter. Anyone reading this thread can see me launching one reasonable, evidence-backed argument after another while you desperately try to block by repeating your "no sale= no case" statement which is both grossly unsubstantiated and proven ridiculously absurd.

Then you try to veer the discussion off topic by presenting a bunch of new statements that have nothing to do with the current debate. How PATHETIC is that?


I am. They're not just assertions, they're well-substantiated arguments. I have accomplished what I sought to accomplish in this thread:

1.) Show that freelance writers are not liable for false advertisement made and launched by the companies they work for.

2.) Humiliate you thoroughly by exposing your gross stupidity about the Lanham Act and even hah!! libel suits. >.<

Now, I have to finish a ton of work. Feel free to repeat your claims of victory. You may want to create more of those dummy accounts and have them post here so that the thread will go to its next page and people won't see how you got your a** kicked again so easily. I'll be back later to just remind everyone of it ALL OVER AGAIN. ^___^

Sucks to be you. :p

Unless you have existing case law and precedent about such a non-trading essay site to prove your assertions about the application of the law in that specific circumstance, your shallow claims about the "law" are nothing more than the silly blabberings of a deranged, desperate woman who has no real-world experience with the application of the laws in question.

There you go again, sticking with your lame definition of what being in commerce means.

A merchant who is selling something is considered a participant in commerce, regardless of whether he is actually able to sell anything. If the definition of being in commerce and of having sold anything was pertinent to the Lanham Act, it would be defined in detail. It's not because guess what, actual sale is not necessary to prove false advertisements under the Lanham Act.

Like I said, you can repeat your messed up claims to victory all you want, I'll just come back and shove it up your a** ALL OVER AGAIN.

See you in 12 or so hours. ^_^

Margaret. As soon as other people chime in about your stupidity and ignorance, you accuse them of being my "dummy accounts." Are you going to make the same assertions about WRT, FreelanceWriter, pheelyks, AsianWriter, etc. because they agree with ALL of my positions about ESL writers and your fraudulent employer? LMAO! Loser. Have some more Cheetos.


The essay site in question has no physical goods, no writers to provide any services, and no business transactions of any kind. Therefore, the site is not "selling" anything. Get that through your 5-inch-thick skull.

Unless you have existing case law and precedent about such a non-trading essay site to prove your assertions about the application of the law in that specific circumstance, your shallow claims about the "law" are nothing more than the silly blabberings of a deranged, desperate woman who has no real-world experience with the application of the laws in question.

Yeah, you need your ugly sleep.

Nice try, you silly dolt. I don't need to find such a case. I won't be able to find a false advertisement case where actual sale was contested because duh... actual sale is not a significant matter in proving whether or not false advertisement was committed. Still can't get that through YOUR thick skull? Not my problem.


That is all there is to it. You don't need to claim that any product was bought. In fact, the offending company may not be selling a product at all as shown on the type of false advertising claim below:

Proving the occurrence of sale is simply NOT part of the legal equation for proving false advertising. For determining damages, maybe but NEVER for determining culpability.

See? No matter how many times you wave your "no sale, no case" flag around, I'll be right here re-posting evidence that would just humiliate you all over again.

'till your next pointlessly repetitive, hopelessly sad post. ^____^

Quote your exact source containing that exact text so that I may proceed to tear you apart with the facts, as usual.

ROFLMAO!!!!

Excuses, excuses. I quoted my exact source the first time I posted this. If you could tear me anything, you'd have done so then. What did you say that time?


PATHETIC.

I won't do your work for you. ^_____^

Yes. You can rely on the companies listed in EssayNews to deliver as promised. The moderators of this forum have completed all the necessary reputation checks on those companies so you won't have to. However, if you have specific writing needs or requests, it still won't hurt foryou to do some checking of your own when you are close to hiring a company. Just to be on the safe side.

I am not so sure that companies paying to advertise here would qualify as a "vetted" service. I have not seen any evidence of the site owners actually creating any difference between the scams and the companies that post here. Although the complaints about the companies that are highlighted in this forum are few and far between, that does not erase the incidental problems that students have had with some of them, and complained about here. The risk of hiring the service still rests within the client. It is his responsibility to find out for himself if the company or writer is worth taking a chance on. While the screaming advertisement does give the company an edge over the other company representatives here, it is important that nobody takes the word of the paid advertisement as truth without verifying it for themselves.

I agree, even though I do pay to advertise here. The most important evidence that someone is legit is how long that person has been here under the same S/N. Someone operating under the same S/N for more than a decade without a single complaint about the quality of his work (or about ripping anybody off, obviously) couldn't possibly be a scam.