Table of Contents
The long-brewing CryptoZoo lawsuit, filed by influencer-turned-entrepreneur Logan Paul against YouTube investigator Stephen Findeisen, better known as Coffeezilla, has cleared its first major hurdle in court. A federal judge has refused to dismiss Paul’s defamation claims, signaling that the high-profile legal battle over allegations tied to Paul’s failed NFT project will proceed.
It’s a case that blurs the line between investigative journalism and influencer accountability, and it’s now officially on track to unfold in a courtroom.
What’s the CryptoZoo Lawsuit All About?
Let’s rewind. Back in 2021, Logan Paul unveiled CryptoZoo, a blockchain-based game where users could hatch NFT eggs into animals and supposedly earn passive income. In reality, the project never fully launched. Many early investors were left holding the digital equivalent of empty zoo cages. Paul in the meantime remained conspicuously quiet on the matter.
Read Also: Logan Paul Faces Allegations Over Undisclosed Crypto Promotions: BBC
Enter Coffeezilla, a YouTuber whose entire brand is centered on crypto investigations and exposing grifts in the digital asset world. In a series of seven YouTube videos released between 2022 and 2023, he accused Paul of operating what he called a “scam”. He presented a narrative where CryptoZoo was less an ambitious Web3 experiment and more a calculated rug pull.
The videos quickly went viral. Logan Paul initially threatened legal action, backed down, and then, over a year later, filed an actual lawsuit. And that’s where things get interesting.
Coffeezilla’s Attempt to Shut Down CryptoZoo Lawsuit Falls Flat
In February 2025, attorneys for Coffeezilla and his production company, Coffee Break Productions LLC, asked a Texas court to dismiss the case entirely. They argued that the “scam” accusations were statements of opinion. Thus, the First Amendment was protecting them.
But U.S. Magistrate Judge Henry J. Bemporad wasn’t convinced.
In a 17-page decision filed on March 26, Judge Bemporad ruled that Findeisen’s language, particularly calling CryptoZoo a “scam”, could reasonably be interpreted as a factual claim rather than hyperbole. The judge noted that Coffeezilla’s reputation as a crypto investigator gives weight to his words and that “an objectively reasonable reader” might take those statements as assertions of fact.
“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,” Bemporad wrote.
Translation: the case stays alive. For now.
What’s Being Alleged?
According to Logan Paul’s legal team, Coffeezilla didn’t just criticize CryptoZoo, he repeatedly and maliciously accused Paul of fraudulent behavior. The lawsuit claims that at least three of Coffeezilla’s YouTube videos made false and damaging assertions, costing Paul both financially and reputationally.
Findeisen has publicly defended his reporting, asserting that everything he said was backed by extensive research, interviews with whistleblowers, and on-chain evidence. But the court’s latest decision suggests the dispute isn’t just a battle over online opinion, it’s one that may require a jury to sort out the facts.
What’s at Stake?
This isn’t just another influencer slap-fight. The CryptoZoo lawsuit is shaping up to be a landmark case in the world of Web3 and digital media.
If Logan Paul succeeds, it could send a ripple through the creator economy, potentially discouraging other YouTubers, podcasters, and Substack sleuths from calling out questionable projects for fear of legal blowback.
On the other hand, if Coffeezilla prevails, it would mark a powerful affirmation of independent journalism in the age of crypto hype, a green light for content creators to investigate big names and controversial deals without walking on legal eggshells.
In a world where trust is rare and financial losses are frequent, the stakes go far beyond CryptoZoo.
What Will Happen Out of CryptoZoo Lawsuit?
With the motion to dismiss denied, the lawsuit now enters the discovery phase. That means depositions, document sharing, and more public scrutiny for both sides. Unless a settlement is reached, the case could eventually go to trial, putting Logan Paul and Coffeezilla on opposite sides of a courtroom showdown that blends NFTs, influencers, and the ever-blurry boundaries of the truth.
Legal experts suggest that a trial could open up uncomfortable questions for both parties: What did Paul know, and when? Was Coffeezilla reckless or responsible in how he portrayed the story?
The answers might finally bring closure to the many CryptoZoo buyers still left holding empty JPEGs and broken promises.
Final Take
The CryptoZoo lawsuit is about much more than two internet celebrities with bruised egos. It’s about setting boundaries in an industry known for hype, speculation, and the occasional fraudster in a hoodie.
It’s about who gets to speak truth to power, and what the consequences are when that truth is disputed.
Most of all, it’s a reminder that the digital wild west we call crypto is slowly becoming subject to real-world rules, and real-world consequences.
Whether you’re team Logan, team Coffee, or just here for the headlines, one thing’s clear:
This case isn’t just about a broken NFT project. It’s about who gets to tell the story, and what happens when the story bites back.
Featured Image by Nikolay Tchaouchev on Unsplash
