Substantive issues in the essay industry

By request, following is a partial list of my assertions regarding the substantive issues in the essay industry:

* The average, ESL writer in the American essay industry is not sufficiently qualified to write-professionally-in the English language for American clients.

* The average, native English-speaking writer in the American essay industry is more qualified to write-professionally-in the English language for American clients than the average, ESL writer.

* Unqualified, ESL writers give a bad name to both qualified, ESL writers and the entire essay industry, in general.

* Writers who are willing to work for paltry compensation (e.g., $2.00-$6.00 per 275-300 words) are almost entirely unqualified, ESL writers (living outside of the US), who have no business accepting payment for their "professional services" under false pretenses.

* Fraudulent companies and writers-in general-give a bad name to legit companies, writers, and the entire essay industry, in general.

* essaywriters.net (bestessays.com) is a fraudulent "company" that misrepresents nearly every aspect of its business.

* The vast majority of fraud in the American essay industry is perpetrated by foreign companies that hire almost entirely foreign, unqualified, ESL writers who misrepresent their location and qualifications.

* Companies and writers have no absolutely no right to dictate to customers what the customers deem to be mandatory traits in a writer.

* Companies and writers have no absolutely no right to deceive customers about their location (i.e., cultural immersion), education, native language, writing skills, etc..

* False advertising and misrepresentation are illegal.

* An individual who works in concert with-and profiteers from-a company that he/she knows is committing fraud and/or misrepresenting his/her qualifications is an accomplice, as dictated by American law.

Nope. you said it yourself, and don't give me none of that "it's a general statement" bull. If there are countless, foreign ESL writers, what do you propose many of them do for a living?


I don't contest this.


Sites that cheat their writers and their clients are blights in this industry. However, none of the misrepresentations matter if both the clients and the writers end up satisfied. Furthermore, writers are free to work where they wish, and do not face any legal consequences if they choose to work for sites that falsely advertise their background.


Sure it does. I did say that a writer can earn a decent living from ew if the writer is careful, but I also have claimed several times that ew cheats both its writers and its clients at every opportunity.


Even if that was true, that does not mean that there aren't any legitimate foreign sites. It also does not mean that the number of these legitimate foreign sites does not equal or exceed the number of legitimate American sites. It just means that there are a lot more foreign sites than American sites altogether, which is probably true since foreign sites are able to charge much lower prices because of exchange rate advantages.


and customers have no right to submit the papers that they buy as their own work. Yet they do anyway. Like I said, this industry is all about results. Customers can visit sites like this and find out for themselves which sites are foreign and which ones are not. I have nothing against sites getting exposed as being foreign or misrepresenting writers' qualifications.


Wrong. Writers have a right to protect their identity. I don't feel comfortable telling a client where I live and where I went to school. I'm sure that clients feel the same about sharing their personal information with their writers.


That's something companies can settle with complainants in court. No writer (freelance or otherwise), can be held legally liable for false advertising committed by the company he or she works for.


In the matter of writers in the essay writing industry, this does not apply. Writers will never be liable for the actions of their companies. They have nothing to fear.

EW_liar's responses speak volumes about her utter lack of character, morality, and legal knowledge. Laughable . . . . This gem is probably my favorite:


What EW_liar is now claiming is that American law does not apply to the essay industry. Wow. I don't understand how this woman can look herself in the mirror.

Nope, I'm claiming that false advertisement laws do not extend to employees of a company, much less to freelance employees.


Riiiight... too bad you'll end up the only one saying so (oh like so many times before). :p


No, but these are absolutely hilarious:

Quote the law that excludes employees from culpability, please.

By the way, please stop oversimplifying, misquoting me, and attempting to misrepresent my positions.

Quote the false advertising law that implicates them.


When did I do that? I already said that writers are free to work for any company regardless of whether that company would falsely advertise their qualifications or not. There's no oversimplification there.

Well, pretty much every time you respond. Example:


Once again, it's not solely a "false advertising" issue.

So what is it about? It's not just about companies saying that their writers have PhDs when they actually don't? If it is then my position remains. A writer cannot be held liable for the actions of the company that he or she works for, PERIOD. ^_^

New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and False Advertising

The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act prohibits the act, use or employment by any person of any unconscionable commercial practice, deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or the knowing concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise. They provide additional damages with legal fees to be paid by the defendant.

SOURCE:
lemonlawclaims.com/false_advertising_claims.htm

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

Aiding and Abetting/Accessory

A criminal charge of aiding and abetting or accessory can usually be brought against anyone who helps in the commission of a crime, though legal distinctions vary by state. A person charged with aiding and abetting or accessory is usually not present when the crime itself is committed, but he or she has knowledge of the crime before or after the fact, and may assist in its commission through advice, actions, or financial support. Depending on the degree of involvement, the offender's participation in the crime may rise to the level of conspiracy.

SOURCE:
criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/aiding_abetting_accessory.html

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

Accomplices, Accessories, Aiders, and Abettors

Even if an accomplice does not carry out the crime, in the eyes of the law the accomplice's pre-crime assistance makes him or her just as guilty as the person who does the deed itself. . . . To distinguish the criminal culpability of one from another, the common law developed specialized terms for the various ways in which one could be an accomplice. For instance, a "principal in the first degree" was the person who actually carried out a crime. A "principal in the second degree" (an "aider and abettor") was a helper who was present at a crime scene but in a passive role, such as acting as a "lookout." An "accessory before the fact" was a helper who was not present at the crime scene. While some state laws retain the common law terminology, few states make any distinction between the criminal liability of crime perpetrators and their accomplices. All can be punished equally, whether they actually perpetrate a crime or only help bring it about.

SOURCE:
nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/article-30145.html

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

Crime Overview Aiding And Abetting Or Accessory

To be convicted as an accessory to a crime, the person must possess an awareness of the crime, either before or after its commission.

SOURCE:

legalinfo.com/content/criminal-law/crime-overview-aiding-and-abet ting-or-accessory.html

Everyone can see that this law refers to the company as the defendant, not a company's writers. That is, unless the writers themselves falsely misrepresent their qualifications to clients.

Writers do not assist in the commission of false advertising/misrepresentation of companies. But hey, I'll give you knowledge. Now here's the rest of the law from the links you provided.

To distinguish the criminal culpability of one from another, the common law developed specialized terms for the various ways in which one could be an accomplice. For instance, a "principal in the first degree" was the person who actually carried out a crime. A "principal in the second degree" (an "aider and abettor") was a helper who was present at a crime scene but in a passive role, such as acting as a "lookout."An "accessory before the fact" was a helper who was not present at the crime scene.While some state laws retain the common law terminology, few states make any distinction between the criminal liability of crime perpetrators and their accomplices. All can be punished equally, whether they actually perpetrate a crime or only help bring it about.

Based on the definitions above, is a writer a principal in the second degree? No. Is a writer an accessory? No. The writer does not in any way help in committing false advertisement/misrepresentation and so is not in any way liable. Furthermore, EVEN IF we assume that mere knowledge of false advertising/misrepresentation being committed counts as a crime (and I am NOT saying that it is), all that a writer needs to do is to report the crime and demand for authorities to force the company he or she is working for to stop misrepresenting his or her credentials.

You lose (was there really any doubt?).

Wrong. The law applies to "any person," clear as day. It does not solely apply to "companies."

In cyberspace, there is no physical "crime scene." Any competent judge will interpret the law in such a way that the "crime scene" is the Internet, considering that the principal and the accomplice need not even be on the same continent to cooperate and/or conspire in the commission of the crime. Indeed, cyber law is developing and advancing very quickly, and I'm sure that there is already case law reflecting such judiciary action.


Wrong. The writer must not only contact the company to demand that the company stop the misrepresentation, but the writer must not write another paper until the company complies.

Wow, that was stupid. Why didn't you quote the rest of the statement, moron?


You lose again. >.<


Oh please, quit playing lawyer. Any competent judge will interpret the law your way? Really? And you know this because? I never said location was the issue, nincompoop.


More of your flawed interpretation of the law. The writer does not contribute at all to the false advertisement by writing papers and so can do as he or she pleases. Even if you take the writer out of the company, it won't affect the company's false advertising at all.

Don't you EVER get tired of getting humiliated?

Indeed, your statement is stupid. Do you not understand what "any person" means?


You're just mad because you know perfectly well that I am correct and that the law is on my side. ;)


Um, just because the writer did not write the fraudulent Web copy does not mean that he/she does not "contribute" to the scam.


If a writer continues working for the company after becoming aware of the fraud, misrepresentation, and other illegal activities, a good lawyer WILL successfully argue that the writer's participation has risen to the level of conspirator. The company's crimes can not be completed without the WILLING, KNOWING support of the writer.

nice job! --and so much less dehumanizing. you'll get my bill in a few weeks.


this no longer exists. it's all a big, global mix now. didn't you get the memo?


right... wait... they give a bad name to what industry?

what about an individual who works in concert with-- and profits from (Jesus, did you just use "profiteer" there? what a bunch of baroque garbage)-- a customer who s/he knows is going defraud their professor and university? every hack in this industry is an accomplice.

what's your problem with ELL, anyway? it's not their fault they didn't grow up speaking English. they're just trying to put bread on the table, like everybody else. why do you have to be such a troll!?

I've been using that exact terminology for years, long before you disgraced this forum with your fraud-supporting presence.

"Profiteering" is a legal term, genius. You just love to ram your feet in your mouth.


You'd love for everyone to believe that tripe, wouldn't you? You don't work for a legitimate, American company that employs top-notch attorneys-at significant monetary expense-to compose legal contracts and TOS documents to comply with all applicable laws and ensure that the sound, personal business ethics of the owners are honored and upheld at all times.

hold up-- you don't know me like that.


you were calling people "ESLs" before I corrected you, and now you'd like to play pretend... very well. it was your idea, WB. great idea. way to improve yourself.

You are, by far, the most clueless person to ever consistently post in this forum.

At no time have I ever typed "ESLs" in the years that I have been a member I dare you to prove otherwise.

In that little world inside your head, maybe. In the real world where the rest of us are? Take a guess. ^_^


So how does the writer contribute? How does the writer make the false advertisement/misrepresentation more effective. I'd love to read your explanation on this one.


How so? C'mon pretend-lawyer, this will all come falling down on you yet again. I already know what you're going to say next and I already know what's wrong with it. So let's end your misery, shall we?

Oversimplify much? Listen, you obviously have a hard time accepting that you can't defeat me in any form of legit debate. All you do is ask the same questions over and over and over again, worded slightly differently each time.

WTF?!? Didn't I just splatter your guts all over the pavement? Why do you always try to pull a fast one on readers by making it seem like you always win when in fact, all you have proven in this thread is that you can't even support your own arguments in the issues that you yourself handpicked as substantive? >.<

Once again:

How does the writer contribute? How does the writer make the false advertisement/misrepresentation more effective. C'mon pretend-lawyer, this will all come falling down on you yet again. I already know what you're going to say next and I already know what's wrong with it. So let's end your misery, shall we? You're inability to answer the question above grossly highlights your FAILURE in defending your stand on this topic.

Gosh.. if you FAIL in these issues that you claim are substantive, it's no wonder why you get utterly trashed in other relevant issues that you refuse to admit are substantive.

Pure delusion . . . .


OPEN YOUR EYES AND READ:

The writer "contributes" by writing for a company that he/she knows blatantly misrepresents his/her location, education, native language, etc.! A fraudulent essay company can misrepresent all day long, but without writers' willing contribution to the scam, the company's efforts would be for nought. Why is that concept so difficult for you to understand? The writer is the ACCESSORY and/or ACCOMPLICE, not the principal. The writer need not be the originator or mastermind of the scam to be charged with the crime.

UNDERSTAND?

No, the writer does not.


That's where you are utterly and ridiculously WRONG. See, I knew that this was what you had in mind. The problem is that writers are not essential to the equation of false advertisement. A company that falsely advertises having writers with PhDs can operate JUST AS WELL as a company that falsely advertises having ANY writers at all.

Actually having or not having writers DOES NOT in any way affect the crime that a company commits when it falsely advertises. Thus, a writer cannot be treated as an accessory/accomplice to false advertising simply by being employed as a freelance writer by a company that practices false advertising.


You wish. You LOSE again. Any other "substantive" issues you want to engage me on? ^__^

Sorry, but your beliefs are simply ass-backwards. Plus, how many times do I have to call you out for INTENTIONALLY oversimplifying? This is NOT-I repeat, NOT-simply about "false advertising." Let me break it down for you, child-style:

1. Company ("principal") initiates misrepresentation, false advertising, and/or unfair competition

2. Writer-innocent at this stage, due to lack of knowledge of the company's crimes-finds out that some and/or all of the company's misrepresentation, false advertising, and/or unfair competition is directly connected to his/her personal provision of service

3a. Writer looks the other way for the sake of money; the writer is now an "accessory," "accomplice," and/or "conspirator"

3b. Writer asks the company to stop the misrepresentation, false advertising, and/or unfair competition; the company does not comply, but the writer continues to provide service, despite full knowledge of the illegal activity that he/she is finalizing; the writer is now an "accessory," "accomplice," and/or "conspirator"

4. Ignorance of the law is no excuse

5. Needing money is not an excuse

END OF STORY.


WRONG! A company can claim that it employs Martians with cosmic degrees whose native language is French. A crime does not exist until the customer pays money and the writer delivers the misrepresented product! Please, do yourself a favor and take a basic course in business management/law.


Wow.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Are you serious?!? REALLY? A company only becomes culpable of false advertsing AFTER a customer pays? Wooohoooooo!!!! Judge/Attorney/Stupidhead WritersBeware has just overturned court rulings across 50 states in the U.S.

What is illegal is the potential to deceive, which is interpreted to occur when consumers see the advertising to be stating to them, explicitly or implicitly, a claim that they may not realize is false and material. The latter means that the claim, if relied on for making a purchasing decision, is likely to be harmful by adversely affecting that decision. Evidence must be obtained for what consumers saw the ad saying, and for the materiality of that, and for the true facts about the advertised item, but no evidence is required that actual deception occurred, or that reliance occurred,or that the advertiser intended to deceive or knew that the claim was false.

worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/False_advertising

Game, set, and...............................MATCH!!!!! ^________________^

Your ignorance is amusing. What is even more laughable is that you don't even realize how much of a fool that you are making of yourself.

Similar to the notion of how a murder does not exist if there is no dead body, legally punishable misrepresentation does not legally take place until a customer PURCHASES and then RECEIVES what proves to be a misrepresented product. (Of course, if the company delivers no product at all, that is just plain theft.) This is legal fact.

What EW_liar is ignorantly suggesting is that a person can be legally prosecuted for misrepresentation solely for creating a Web site advertising, for example, "the best, American-made watches in the world" (despite having only Chinese knock-offs or no watches at all), without ever having made a sale.

By the way:


Thank you for providing another quote that proves me correct. NO sale, NO crime.

"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"

I'm ignorant? LOL!!!! I've just added a new statement the list of WB's stupid antics.

WritersBeware BELIEVES that in order for a company to be GUILTY of false advertising, a customer must have purchased a product from it.


Now who's quoting OUT OF CONTEXT? I wonder why you didn't include the rest of that statement... Oh, I know.. because if you did, your FAILURE would be all the more obvious.

What is illegal is the potential to deceive, which is interpreted to occur when consumers see the advertising to be stating to them, explicitly or implicitly, a claim that they may not realize is false and material. The latter means that the claim, if relied on for making a purchasing decision, is likely to be harmful by adversely affecting that decision. Evidence must be obtained for what consumers saw the ad saying, and for the materiality of that, and for the true facts about the advertised item, but no evidence is required that actual deception occurred, or that reliance occurred, or that the advertiser intended to deceive or knew that the claim was false.

What is illegal is making a claim such that IF the claim is relied upon by potential customers, it would lead them to making harmful choices. What needs to be proven is not that customers actually made harmful choices, but rather that the claim is likely to lead them into making such choices.

You are soooooooo dumb about the law, aren't you? I DARE you to ask your "friends'" opinions on this one. C'mon, chicky chicky... let's see you ask them. ^_________^

LMAO! Your calculated re-wording and misinterpretation isn't fooling anyone. Again, here's the actual quote, without being EW_liarized:


If there is no PURCHASE, there is no HARM! Wake up! You're making a complete ass out of yourself.


That part is ALL that matters. No purchase, no crime. END OF STORY. All of your smoke screening is pathetic. Just admit that you're wrong. You're getting downright sad.


I don't need help. I don't need to distract. You do.

O.O Are you REALLY believing what you're typing? No purchase, no crime? LOL!!!! You're just about to get buried deeper in your own s-i*.

Here are the Proof Requirements for a false advertising claim:

To establish that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things:
(1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity;
(2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceivea substantial portion of its targeted audience;
(3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience;
(4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce;
and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff.
The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer.

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/False+Advertising

Do the above proof requirements mandate that a purchase to be made before a company becomes liable for a false advertisement? NO. WritersBeware is trying to use pure attitude to try and escape another beating. We all know it won't work. She has definitely made an a** of herself once again.


Oh, I beg to disagree. ^____^ However, I doubt that WRT, FreelanceWriter, Pheelyks or any of the other people that you fantasize about being friends with will come to your rescue. I don't think that ANYONE in their right mind would side with you on yet another silly, grossly ignorant, unbelievably stupid claim.


This is a fine addition to my list of reasons why WBIASD (WritersBeware is a stupid dolt). Thanks. ^_____^

WB... you nationalist crazy... why don't you do something useful? can I make a suggestion? go to the police and tell them that a Ukrainian ESL writer attacked you in a dark alley, confused you, and took your baby.

"he was tall and blonde, officer... very big... with sort of a... Kid N Play haircut... he was wearing boxing trunks, and right before he attacked, he said, in a deadpan voice, 'I will break you.'"

you might want to throw some acid on your own face, while you're at it.


"me Drago can no write, only break face."

hey lunatic-- speaking of proof checks-- where are your statistical sources on this one?

Haven't you heard? WB makes use of "general statistics" in substantiating her quantitative claims.

______________________________________________________________
One is only liable to false advertising charges if a customer actually bought the product being falsely advertised.

fervent, unrelenting, years-long, public support/defense of a belief-in writing-constitutes action in the eyes of the law.

- from the mad imaginings of pretend-lawyer, WritersBeware (2010)

Here are the actual provisions of the Lanham Act which undoubtedly shows that actual purchase of a product is not necessary to prove false advertising (contrary to the wild imaginings of pretend-lawyer, WritersBeware).

§ 43 (15 U.S.C. §1125). False designations of origin; false description or representation
(a) (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which--

(A) is likely to causeconfusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or

(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to bedamaged by such act.

law.uconn.edu/homes/swilf/ip/statutes/lanham43.htm

Since freelance writers are not in any way connected with a company's marketing team, false advertising occurs without any participation from the writer at all. Furthermore, it is reasonable to think that a false advertisement/misprepresenting statement is always posted without the writers' knowledge, making it impossible for the writer to have had any say (or any part) in the decision of the company to falsely advertise. Lastly (and as I already pointed out in a previous post), false advertising occurs regardless of whether or not a company actually has freelance writers to begin with. A misrepresentation of having PhD holding writers is as bad a crime whether the company has no writers with PhDs or a company has no writers at all.

This definitely and with finality proves that a freelance writer plays no part in a company's false advertising practices and so is not legally liable for them.

The plaintiff must prove ALL FIVE. No sale, no injury. End of story.

True.


False and LAME.

That was too pathetic, mashing a true and a false statement together to hide your failure.

All 5 statements must be proven.

Do any of the 5 statements even imply that a sale is necessary? No.

You lost in a debate topic of your choosing, how sad is that?

I have always believed in this. Client satisfaction is all that matters. If an E SL writer works closely withan ENL client , the client always walks away extremely satisfied and more often than not, ends up asa repeat client for the company and writer. I know this to be true having seen it happen several times before. It is all just a a matter of communication and coordination on both sides.

The problem, is that the students value the cost over the quality of the work. Which is why they tend to go with the ESL writers, consciously knowing that the work quality they will recieve will definitely be of an inferior quality. These clients tend to ask "how much?" Then, when they hear the cost of ordering a paper from a legitimate ENL writer, they never follow up on their inquiry. They believe that if they cannot afford the cost, then they should take what they can get from the ESL writer, who comes at a fraction of the cost. Which is why they have no one to blame when they end up in revision hell or unsubmitted papers limbo with the ESL writer. They get what they pay for.

Actually, I don't think most of them have any idea at all that their projects will be written by ESL writers, because they're fooled by flashy websites and don't really read them closely enough to spot all the obvious indications that they're dealing with ESL organizations. They just figure that any company with a nice-looking automated website must be legit and they get sucked in by their suprisingly-cheap prices. It isn't until they receive their projects written in unusably-bad ESL "English" that they realize why their prices are so low. Then, many of them eventually come to someone like me after already having wasted money on one or two different "cheaper" services. By that time, they're often very skittish and hesitant to trust me at all, and I have to waste time explaining that they're not going to have a similar experience with me and (sometimes) pointing out to them some of the obvious indications of ESL writing on the websites of the companies that ripped them off. Most of them don't even find this forum until after getting ripped off once or twice, or even three times, first.

This is something that I have been wondering about ever since I came to this forum. The people that own it do not seem to be highly interested in raising the profile of this very helpful gathering place. Almost as if they prefer to keep it a secret for some reason. Running a search for essay company writing site reviews does not bring up this forum. Niether does Essay site review forums turn up ES. At least, not at the top of the search where it should properly be placed. Which is probably why the students do not end up at our doorstep until after several traumatic experiences. Don't you think we should encourage the owners of this forum to work more on its promotion or search engine positioning at least? That way we can help the students, before they end up getting conned.

Chances are that their first searches are probably just for academic essay companies, which direct them to some of the very legit-looking websites of the countless scam companies in this industry. They probably don't even start Googling essay companies + "scam" until after they've already been ripped off, because when they placed their first order, they simply had no idea that the majority of companies and "writers" in this industry are totally unqualified at best and outright scams at worst. By the time they reach out to me in desperation, some of my clients have already tried and wasted a lot of money on totally unusable ESL trash from one or two other companies and/or writers with a heavy online advertising presence and/or in response to direct solicitation on Facebook or Twitter. A few of my clients were actually ripped off three times by the time they found me.