Re --Maybe what they are doing is technically legal in every respect, I don't know. Frankly, I doubt that. But regardless, they are scum and cons, IMHO, the lowest of the low because they know full well they don't have a product or even the hope of a product. They are intentionally and actively misleading people with the object of enriching themselves at the expense of others who are gullible.--
I looked up the terms 'libel' and 'slander' as I think they apply here:
en.wikipedia.org
Note:
In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of making a false statement that negatively affects someone's reputation. "Defamation" is the term generally used internationally, and is accordingly used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander".
Libel and Slander
"Libel", "slander", and "defamation" are commonly used as synonyms in ordinary language, at least in Britain and Ireland. However, those jurisdictions that distinguish "libel" and "slander" as legal concepts do so on the following broad basis: defamatory communication in writing is termed "libel" while one made via the spoken word is termed "slander". However, because the underlying distinction is between permanent and transient communications, some jurisdictions regard all defamatory communications (even spoken statements) broadcast on radio or television as "libel". Both acts share a common legal history, although they may be treated differently under some legal systems.
So I think as we have a written form, the applicable term is 'libel'.
We shall see where this leads, shall we.
Have a pleasant day...well, as pleasant as is possible in the circumstances. |
