That can't be the actual laws behind it tho that's subjective that it's
blatantly fake. I knew it was. Cirstolmethod even sent out a tweet and he's insinuating in it that some people are so stupid they are taking it seriously. I would just think somewhere in the article or on the page he has to have some disclaimer in it somewhere. I didn't scan it feverishly so I dunno if it says it or not, but if I were Scott, I wouldn't sue, but I'd probably ask him to take it down. I mean if someone google's Scott Stricklin's name this article is going to come up, and like the author said, some people are too stupid to know a blatantly fake article is fake.