Does this site do oxymoron(ism) ?

Libel? Is that your final answer?

1. If wewriteessays.com is not engaging in commerce (i.e., not selling goods or services), there is no legally actionable false advertising.

2. If there is no commerce, that is strictly a matter of libel that may be legally pursuable by other essay Web site owners.

I have to go now but when I return, I'm going to show people here why #1, the above example CAN'T be libel and why #2, it most CERTAINLY can lead to a false advertising claim.

What matters is that writers, ESL or otherwise should feel safe that they are in no way liable for any false advertisement crimes being committed by their employers.

Since (a)(1) clearly indicates that goods, services, and commerce must be present, all that follows in (A) and (B) does not apply to an essay site that has never sold a paper (goods), never sold writing (services), and never engaged in commerce (i.e., sold a product or service).

Since (a)(1) clearly indicates that goods, services, and commerce must be present, all that follows in (A) and (B) does not apply to an essay site that has never sold a paper (goods), never sold writing (services), and never engaged in commerce (i.e., sold a product or service).

Any employee who knowingly helps to enable and/or perpetuate the crimes is either an accomplice or an accessory to those crimes. That is a FACT.

No surprise here, WritersBeware can't face the evidence

I already schooled you with your own evidence, so just STFU already.

despite how many times you desperately plead with them to affirm 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.

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

§ 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 cause confusion, 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 be damaged by such act.

Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods,

You may want to create more of those dummy accounts

A merchant who is selling something is considered a participant in commerce, regardless of whether he is actually able to sell anything.

§ 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 cause confusion, 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 be damaged by such act.

See you in 12 or so hours. ^_^

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,

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 deceive a 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;
(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.

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.

EW_writer:
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 deceive a 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;
(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.

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

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

I quoted my exact source the first time I posted this.

COWARD

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

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?

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