- A Texas judge has denied YouTuber Coffeezilla’s motion to dismiss Logan Paul’s defamation lawsuit concerning the CryptoZoo project
- The court determined that Coffeezilla’s statements labeling Paul’s CryptoZoo as a “scam” could be interpreted as factual assertions rather than opinions
- This ruling allows Paul’s defamation claims to proceed, highlighting the legal risks influencers face when making allegations online
A Texas judge has ruled that influencer Logan Paul’s defamation lawsuit against YouTuber Coffeezilla, whose real name is Stephen Findeisen, will move forward. The court found that Findeisen’s characterization of Paul’s CryptoZoo project as a “scam” could be seen as a factual assertion, not merely an opinion, thereby meeting the criteria for defamation. 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.
CoffeeZilla Called Out CryptoZoo Shambles
The conflict centers around CryptoZoo, a blockchain-based game promoted by Paul in 2023, which promised users the ability to purchase and breed unique NFT animals. However, the project faced significant issues and failed to deliver on its promises, leading to public criticism. Findeisen, known for investigating online scams, produced several videos alleging that CryptoZoo was a fraudulent scheme and labeled Paul a “scammer.” In response, Paul filed a defamation lawsuit, asserting that these statements were false and damaging to his reputation.
In January last year, Paul offered to refund those who bought the project’s “Base Egg” and “Base Animal” collectibles, adding that collectors will get back the NFTs’ “original purchase price.” However, the move attracted an X community note which rather undermined the offer:
Today, I am incredibly happy to announce that I am delivering on my promise to buy back Base Egg and Base Animal CryptoZoo NFTs for their original purchase price. This buy-back program is being carried out at https://t.co/XIQzLAGKiG. Claims can be submitted through this site… pic.twitter.com/VMPDHvdXkq
— Logan Paul (@LoganPaul) January 4, 2024
Paul sued Findeisen in June last year, with the defendant filing a motion to dismiss the case, alleging that Paul had no case because his words were clearly opinion, rather than stated fact. However, Texas Magistrate Judge Henry J. Bemporad last week recommended denying Findeisen’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, noting that Findeisen’s use of the term “scam” and his role as a crypto investigator could lead a reasonable person to interpret his statements as factual claims rather than personal opinions:
At the pleading stage, Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged that the statements at issue in this case are reasonably capable of defamatory meaning and are not unactionable opinions.
Both parties have 14 days from the issuance of the recommendation to file objections, although the fact that the judge has ruled to emphatically on such a crucial aspect of the case doesn’t bode well for Findeisen.
