- Logan Paul has sued YouTuber Coffeezilla for referring to the CryptoZoo NFT project as a scam
- Paul argues that the YouTuber’s comments are false and amount to defamation
- Paul holds that the project was derailed by unscrupulous advisers and not his lack of commitment
Influencer Logan Paul is once again on YouTuber Coffeezilla’s neck concerning the CryptoZoo NFT project. Paul has filed a defamation lawsuit in a Texas court alleging that the YouTuber, whose real name is Stephen Findeisen, portrayed the influencer in a bad light by saying that he is running a scam through the project. Paul said that the project was stalled by malicious advisers, maintaining that he was committed to the project, something that may be tricky to prove in court.
$75,000 in Damages
The influencer bases his accusations on videos published by Coffeezilla two years ago that refer to him as the “biggest scam” in connection to the NFT collection. According to Paul, such statements are defamatory and the YouTuber should be held accountable.
Paul alleges that Coffeezilla made crude comments about him knowing “full well” that he was committed to creating a “legitimate blockchain game.” The influencer wanted to take the YouTuber to court in 2022 but chose to try to focus on resuscitating the project.
Paul wants Coffeezilla to pay $75,000 in damages and cater for the cost of the lawsuit but left the court to determine the total amount he should pay.
ZOO Token Holders Not Eligible
The lawsuit comes six months after Paul announced that he’ll be refunding CryptoZoo NFT collectors. He, however, said that he won’t refund those who invested in the project’s token, ZOO, whose value has since plummeted to zero and has no trading volume.
Paul may use his earlier intentions to make collectors whole to strengthen his stand that he wasn’t out to run a scam. Apart from Coffeezilla, some investors have in the past labeled the project as a scam and some even taking Paul to court.
With some investors considering the CryptoZoo NFT project a scam, it’s to be seen whether the court will rule in favor of Paul, considering he has indicated intentions to refund investors.
