Exact(2)
In an effort to settle the original copyright infringement claims, authors, publishers and database companies undertook four years of what they said were intensive, complex and costly negotiations.
That is, by explaining a historical actors' mind-set, condition, or claims, authors were able to imply the reason for a consequent action.
Similar(58)
Scribd.com has posted a statement entitled "What Ever Happened to Fact Checking?" in response to a recent article that claimed authors were "fighting" the site for copyright infringement.
A report in the Sunday Times claimed authors from the US would be allowed to compete for the first time - but organisers said the information was "incomplete".
This proves that the message was written by its claimed author.
In proving the claim the authors in [2] use an example [2, p. 6].
As they themselves claim, the authors' approach has no basis on the communication theory.
Then, Santorum claimed us authors were "driven by money".
A disclosure in the study's author information claimed: "The authors have no financial interest to declare regarding the content of this article".
There is always small claims court, the authors tell us.
Furthermore, the authors' claims for the accuracy of the predictions appear to be without value.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com