I like to believe Shaq has a whole room in his house with nothing but a really big pile of coats on the floor and that he hides underneath whenever anyone comes around trying to serve him legal documents.
I like to picture a Scooby Doo style chase scene with the people chasing Shaq trying to serve him legal papers with them just running through random doors and coming out others with no reasonable pathways in Shaq's big ass mansion.
As the LegalEagle already said, they are gonna have a hard time trying to prove these youtubers had any reason to believe FTX was a bad investment and knowingly defrauded investors.
I think it will be impossible, and the idea that youtubers or anyone else paid for advertisements/promotions should have had insights into FTX's fraudulent activities is dumb to begin with.
@@Jonathan-Pilkington Yeah, a lot of takes on some other vids saying the tubers didn't do their due diligence, as did Coffee but how are these guys supposed to know more about FTX and Alameda than the multiple government agencies that only found out after the collapse? Unless I'm mistaken and it was really obvious but no major news outlets were raising red flags?
@@Rosskles Don't feed the bots, let them starve and then eventually they should leave. They garner attention, and replying apparently gives them a bigger ego to stroke.
As sad as that is, it's true. The obvious rate drops when cryptos are opened to, or heavily bought by, the public isn't considered proof due to it being "circumstantial"
@@strandkorbst9643 I'm pretty sure that dude is outdated, he needs updating every hour for a new patch - I don't think he even knows what's going on everyday.
@@dr.hannibal8338 That's what they are called! Have you seen those shorts where it would be "Watch for full video" and it'll show a lady almost exposing herself?
As a person who had to learn the hard way from being scammed. I have no pity for people that were knowingly part of this mess. Hopefully they go after the big names and not the little guys.
If any of the endorsers knew FTX was a scam (of which I’m sure at least a few were) and still took the money and sponsored it then yes I hope they do. Otherwise I would say the onus is split between the viewer and the endorser, on the endorser for not doing more research into it particularly if they position themselves as an expert, and on the viewer for the same reason. As a viewer/human you should be healthily skeptical of everything, particularly if someone else is giving you advice and should do your own research even if that person may have a good rep in whatever it is (like Warren Buffet for long term stocks).
They don't get sued because freedom of speech exists I can say anything I want about anybody I want and you can't do anything about, yes there are some stipulations like you can't blatantly call someone a rapist publicly without proof that's called defamation, good example of this Brett farve sueing Pat McAfee for defamation Because he talked about Brett being sued for welfare fraud. However pat used the word allegedly multiple times meaning Brett and his lawyers are retarded as hell and will not win this case lol remember if it's true then say it
normies clap over anything. charlie just speaks middle of the road opinions and everyone claps like seals. like I get it, he's not an asshole but the dude is hardly a messiah. he hardly has any against the grain views and he says whatever the majority of people will like. he plays the game and stays within the lines like a good boy.
It must be stressful to find out a company or service you promote/ed turned out to be scummy. I've seen a few sources I very much enjoy and trust show support for products that turned out to be just that. But, I also do my own research, and I recommend everyone do that when considering investing in anything, no matter who promotes it.
Honestly I think they deserve it. They like to be called experts and give out "financial advice", so they can handle being sued for advising people in investing into a scam. I hope they'll actually end up paying a good amount of money over this, even if it's just legal fees.
You see they don’t though. They usually say something or show something that says they aren’t professionals and contact a cpa which most people don’t 🤷🏽♂️
One thing we should remember is that broadcasting companies have teams to handle laws and PR, UA-cam is now giving the average person the ability to broadcast but as evident by the lawsuits, UA-camrs don't understand a lot of the laws around this stuff
Fr, no one had prior knowledge of their financials… no one would have had that info besides higher ups @ FTX & Alameda Research…FTX was assumed trustworthy because of their large client base as well as partnerships with MLB, Brady etc
I do think this all brings up a very important thing that UA-camrs (in general) need to figure out. Which is how much do you need to know about your sponsor. We've seen over the past year or so, quite a few controversies over UA-camrs promoting scams, like Established Titles etc.. Obviously Charlie considers this, as he usually only promotes his own ventures, something he knows very well about. I do think it's an important issue that does need to be addressed, especially as more UA-camrs rely on sponsors.
It's always safe to be skeptical, as a viewer and as a content creator with a sponsorship. Do the research, and you can avoid losing money. I appreciate people like you and Coffeezilla putting information out there for the rest of us to be able to understand and learn from.
Exactly, which is why I don’t think the UA-camrs who did sponsorships should feel personal guilt for those who lost all their money, they couldn’t have know what FTX looked like inside and beyond that I can not understand how ANYONE can put their entire life’s worth of money in something, it’s just so baffling to me.
Depends if there’s research out there in the first place. Problem with FTX is that it wasn’t exactly a known fact SBF was embezzling away everyone’s money until he went broke and had to file for bankruptcy, then it became an international story that was investigated. But if you’re a financial channel where your whole gimmick/niche is providing sound financial advice, then isn’t it fair to assume that said financial channel should’ve done their due diligence if they are going to promote/vet a service to invest one’s life’s savings or retirement portfolios with??? This is a really tough situation though because everyone and I mean EVERYONE was pushing crypto sponsors. Not just financial advice channels but you had a lot of podcast, news channels, random goofy comedy stuff, etc. And if you’re a regular viewer/subscriber and see someone you routinely watch (aka an influencer or role model) repeatedly saying invest in crypto today and use my promo code for a free $100 in crypto or one month free trading etc, well now you’ve been influenced to buy this service because the adviser (the UA-cam channel) has promoted it. It’s absolutely funny how one channel I watched at least once a week for several years promoted a crypto service, then FTX Scandal comes to light and suddenly all the crypto promotions are gone and he 180s saying don’t trust crypto cause it’s not a better currency 🤦🏻♂️ But the flip side is, yeah you don’t HAVE to buy something because a celeb or whatever says to. That’s be like suing Shaq because he used to have an endorsement with Oreos and so you bought Oreos all the time and now have diabetes. Is that a fair lawsuit? Probs not (although in America one thing will get thrown out while a different judge will take a very similar case and try it very seriously). Point is, whole situation is a Crapshoot 🤷🏻♂️
Even if the lawsuit goes nowhere, it’s hopefully going to show everyone much more clearly now that financial UA-camrs aren’t all knowing and that the things they promote may be things they don’t believe in but just promote because they’re being paid to.
10:30 literally their response "I feel bad they're irresponsible" boils down to "don't trust me or my advice". He gave the worst possible response, doubling down on the idea that their word isn't to be trusted and can be easily paid for.
The fact that these youtubers didn't ask how FTX was able to offer such high returns just for keeping your money there shows how little they care about their audience.
@@oskarekelund1476 yes but he was a financial advisor advertising ftx. He technically has plausible deniability because he can say it was just an advert but at the end of the day ftx only paid him specifically because he had an audience who listened to him on other financial matters. He wasn’t just another famous person, he was targeted because of his credibility for general financial advice.
@@dravidianking1298 in his videos advertising FTX he did say that crypto is a risky investment and that IF you are going to invest then you should only put a small amount of you portfolio in to FTX. He didn’t tell them go and invest right now this is 100% safe, what more can he do then telling them that crypto is risky and that they only should put in money that they can afford to loose? If an adult invest money because they saw an ad and the investment fails then he is responsible for his investment, not the one advertising. It would be different if he paid a financial expert to manage his money and invest it, then the investor would have to take some accountability, but to blame a youtuber that made ads is childish in my eyes.
@@dravidianking1298 Being a financial advisor is irrelevant, theres no legal basis to sue 3rd party paid promoters for a paid promotion because the CEO of the promoted business turned out to be a fraud, would you support suing tech youtubers for promoting NORD VPN if it turns out to be stealing user info? of course not, because its not their fault or responsibility.
@@oskarekelund1476It actually wouldn't be different for a financial advisor unless you can prove they misled you, lied, or invested your money with too much risk. Proving that last point is difficult because all investment is speculation. If your advisor dumped all of your money into FTX you'd probably have a lawsuit, but if they put say 10% in you'd really have no recourse for getting that money back.
10:45 Yeah, that's what I was thinking is that the only way the lawsuit has much standing in court is if they could prove that the UA-camrs had prior knowledge and coordination of the scam. But it may depend on the judge/jury. The one thing that is certain is the UA-camrs are going to lose at least thousands of dollars each to legal fees if a court decides to take the case, regardless of outcome.
First Charlie completely obliterates what remaining online career Sneako had in a matter of four tweets, and then next thing he's covering a story about UA-camrs being sued for a billion dollars as if it were any other typical Friday night. Absolute Legend.
I believe that Bin was possessed by Deadman to warn people about FTX because there’s no way he’ll warn people AGAINST crypto. It’s like Captain America saying Hydra isn’t so bad.
I suspect this is why dislikes were actually removed. so corporate propaganda can scam easier. around the time dislikes got removed people were getting more and more vocal about those types of vids
@@immapotato1 This is true. I noticed that the dislike button got removed the moment the White House channel started posting videos with Biden because... you guessed it - they got dislike bombed. And then not even a week later they started considering it. That and corporations, yeah, but we all know governments and corporations go hand in hand.
I mean to be fair nobody forced them to do this. I work very hard for my money and I will never invest money in what a youtuber is selling. Just gotta have some common sense.
It's sadly simple: You can't sue a TV channel whose Ad got you to buy to buy crap. Or an investment firm and their employee's, if they give you a shit advice. The UA-camrs fall into the same category. They were promoting something but the final decision was still on the individuals, as was doing their due diligence and research. Especially when it comes to investing in something you know NOTHING about. DON'T, simple as. If you know nothing of a market, don't invest volatile money, unless you're prepared for the possible losses. Finally, unless they can prove that their ties to FTX was more than just a business arrangement for promotions, they will loose the lawsuit.
I'm late to this, but there is a caveat to that: Investment firms, brokerages, and brokers are *licensed*. And giving financial advice *without* a license is, in the US at least, generally quite illegal. If you encourage investing, or call yourself an 'investment advisor' or similar, and you're not licensed? In the US that's a crime (particularly *if you're being compensated* somehow, either by your clients or by the organization you're talking up). One with a maximum penalty of one-hundred fifty thousand dollars and up to one-hundred fifty years in prison.
@@patrickharrington9394 Sure but in most cases, they don't really sell. They just let their followers sheep mentality kick in. They don't even need to flaunt it, upsell it, just the "They named it" is enough to see a LOT of people just buy and get into they know nothing about.
If a scammer or a company are sued or fined for less than what they made then that's just a way for them to get away with most of the money. They should always be fined or sued for more that what they made.
"A broken clock is right twice a day" I couldn't have said it better myself. It's ironic that they only correctly predicted the movement of the crypto market as it was beginning to crash.
It’s wild to me. I don’t even put full faith on UA-camrs and their video game reviews. But there’s people ready to sink their lives on their words lol.
Somewhere in between a paid celebrity endorsement, which is just an employee doing a job, or Mint Mobile being pitched by the celebrity owner... is an 'influencer' who should know better as they are manipulating paid subscribers. Just like pump and dump stock schemes, these advocates are pushing sales of suspect financial products without the credentials or disclaimers required... and should be held financially accountable for the damage they did.
ok what about the people who didn't know anything shady was going on until everything came to light, and only promoted it because on the surface it seemed legit
In fact, if a quick reading of the IAA (the Investment Advisers Act of 1940) is anything to go by, it doesn't get rid of *any* responsibility (in the US, anyway). Zero. None. If any of the people who were talking up FTX, Celsius, or any other major name in Crypto lost investors money, the words 'this is not financial advise' are about as legally relevant as a roll of toilet paper. And the ones who were *compensated* for doing so are as protected by those words as the cardboard tube of that same roll if it were at the bottom of the ocean. Unless they were licensed, of course. But licensed investment advisers have no reason to put those words on their advise, so safe to say they probably weren't.
Allowing a case like this to be heard will set a huge precedent. Imagine every paid advertiser being held responsible for the product they promote(d) ?
Yeah, this lawsuit may not even go anywhere passed the initial phase but damn it all, if it does make it to trial, let it be the wildest fucking court-case of all time.
There's just such a huge issue right now where anyone on platforms like this can say or do anything with absolutely zero consequences, with exceptions for a limited number specific things which would get the platform itself in legal trouble (or trouble with advertisers, or when an incident gains a massive amount of negative publicity.
You can. That would be false advertising suits assuming the beauty gurus were promoting the product. It’s just that makeup is a lot cheaper than crypto, so no one will actually sue.
I would never trust the word of any goddamn UA-camr as gospel - love you, Charlie - regardless of how much they demonstrated expertise in a subject. UA-camrs are, first and foremost, entertainers. Their credentials are, essentially, whatever the hell they say they are. While I do feel like these particular UA-camrs are scumbags, and I don't really feel that bad for them having to fight a frivolous lawsuit... the fact of the matter is, their viewers judgement is sorely lacking, and they are at majority fault for basically taking these clowns at their word.
A great example of this is Jonny Harris. People always sooking that his stories are historically inaccurate. He never claims they are dead accurate and people just don’t understand that he is a friggen entertainment UA-camr not a historian/scholar
Well said, The larger youtube channels make many times more money per month than us working plebs. They may claim they are like us but the info is there that proves otherwise. This is why I never donate cash to anyone but instead give hard goods to local charities such as pet food to animal shelters or clothing to good will.
Could the issue be that we're letting UA-camrs convince us that they're financial experts when at best, most of them are people who got lucky financially who also know how to make videos? We've seen the stock market, housing market and crypto market do some wild shit in the last few years and I genuinely don't believe that anyone knew for sure what was going on the whole time
That's why influencers and content creators should always be honest and disclose when they're being paid to promote products and services. That way they can't be held accountable for things like this.
That's what SBF and his father were trying to do with all the cpntributions to democrats and cozying up to Gessner. But, he wanted them to only allow FTX in the US and outlaw Binance. Meanwhile he was stealing everyone's money and hoping for a government bailout if FTX became a regulated security exchange.
@@popsicIes basically sbf was giving big monies to US government officials to try to get them to make ftx (and only ftx) more official and secure. So in the scenario where ftx goes broke, the government can bail them out. That exact situation has happened a couple of days ago with Silicon Valley bank and a few others
Charlie you are the best youtuber in my opinion you don’t just bring the content but you bring your message of what u have to say on certain topics. Thank you 🙏🏾. You are an inspiration to me and others.
@P bro do you not get bored doing this. Also why keep trying when it clearly doesn't work, you get no likes or views, and you're among literally thousands of other people trying. I'm genuinely curious here, why do you do it and what do you think you'll achieve?
That is a shitty analogy. It is more like suing mcdonald's for serving you coffee at an extremely high temperature and leading to you having your labia fucking fused to your thighs.
I can't stop imagining 7ft tall Shaquille O'Neal hiding from multiple lawyers behind a single potted plant
something drake would do
Same, I have this mental image now of this legendary game of hide and seek being played between Shaq and like 5 lawyers across his entire estate
That's a Rick Fox move.
Nah he seems more like the type to hide under his bed
I cant either lmao
I like how the lawsuit is probably going to go nowhere but the UA-camrs still have to pay for lawyers
Our legal system badly needs modification. It’s designed to bleed the public dry… such a scam.
Pretty sad tbh…
like these botters YT refuses to do anything about
even at the expense of their own userbase
@Did ⸜⁄ Prove It
@Don't Read My Profile Photo Good, Cause Nobody Was Going To Read It
I like to believe Shaq has a whole room in his house with nothing but a really big pile of coats on the floor and that he hides underneath whenever anyone comes around trying to serve him legal documents.
his house is bigger than a freaking palace. I think the guy looking for him got lost 😂
@@immapotato1 probably for the best, imagine having to serve papers to a guy the size of shrek.
@@immapotato1 He probably never found his way out.
@@Sun_BearsRV shaq needed the protein…
😂😂😂
I like to picture a Scooby Doo style chase scene with the people chasing Shaq trying to serve him legal papers with them just running through random doors and coming out others with no reasonable pathways in Shaq's big ass mansion.
i swear thats how Shaq's mind works lmao
I’m high asf right now I can’t stop laughing why’d you do this to me💀💀💀
My bad. RIP
Benny Hill
As the LegalEagle already said, they are gonna have a hard time trying to prove these youtubers had any reason to believe FTX was a bad investment and knowingly defrauded investors.
I think it will be impossible, and the idea that youtubers or anyone else paid for advertisements/promotions should have had insights into FTX's fraudulent activities is dumb to begin with.
@@Jonathan-Pilkington Yeah, a lot of takes on some other vids saying the tubers didn't do their due diligence, as did Coffee but how are these guys supposed to know more about FTX and Alameda than the multiple government agencies that only found out after the collapse?
Unless I'm mistaken and it was really obvious but no major news outlets were raising red flags?
@@Rosskles Don't feed the bots, let them starve and then eventually they should leave. They garner attention, and replying apparently gives them a bigger ego to stroke.
As sad as that is, it's true. The obvious rate drops when cryptos are opened to, or heavily bought by, the public isn't considered proof due to it being "circumstantial"
@@seandunne4931 ...clever girl.
"financial youtubers are looked at as experts"
what a world to live in
The things Charlie talks about make it feel like theres a historic moment happening every day.
NPC.
BOT
Bruh. So when he talks about some irrelevant video game shit, it feels like he is covering "historic moments" ????
@@strandkorbst9643 I'm pretty sure that dude is outdated, he needs updating every hour for a new patch - I don't think he even knows what's going on everyday.
by the ftx logic, justin bieber and steph curry should also be sued
hearing shaq trying to hide from a lawsuit due to a crypto scam just sounds like a fever dream
Okay the sex bots are everywhere omfg
He is what? 7 ft 5? hearing him trying to hide is inspiring cartoon humour anyways, can’t wait till South Park picks this up a year later
Just had a weird dream last night.
@@Seals_arecutiessex bots 💀
@@dr.hannibal8338 That's what they are called! Have you seen those shorts where it would be "Watch for full video" and it'll show a lady almost exposing herself?
As a person who had to learn the hard way from being scammed. I have no pity for people that were knowingly part of this mess. Hopefully they go after the big names and not the little guys.
If any of the endorsers knew FTX was a scam (of which I’m sure at least a few were) and still took the money and sponsored it then yes I hope they do. Otherwise I would say the onus is split between the viewer and the endorser, on the endorser for not doing more research into it particularly if they position themselves as an expert, and on the viewer for the same reason.
As a viewer/human you should be healthily skeptical of everything, particularly if someone else is giving you advice and should do your own research even if that person may have a good rep in whatever it is (like Warren Buffet for long term stocks).
Do you understand what antisemitism is now?
If you’re not a midwit it should be abundantly clear by now.
Coffeezilla's and Charlie's humor is unmatched, and the best part is, they don't get sued for it
I mean… eh. But both are trustworthy, so I’ll give them that.
They don't get sued because freedom of speech exists I can say anything I want about anybody I want and you can't do anything about, yes there are some stipulations like you can't blatantly call someone a rapist publicly without proof that's called defamation, good example of this Brett farve sueing Pat McAfee for defamation Because he talked about Brett being sued for welfare fraud. However pat used the word allegedly multiple times meaning Brett and his lawyers are retarded as hell and will not win this case lol remember if it's true then say it
Pfft unfortunately coffee has been sued. Good news is that it has either already been dropped or it's not gonna go anywhere (SLAPP type suit)
Well actually if you look into the history, both parties surprisingly had been sued by the people that dont like their contents
normies clap over anything. charlie just speaks middle of the road opinions and everyone claps like seals. like I get it, he's not an asshole but the dude is hardly a messiah. he hardly has any against the grain views and he says whatever the majority of people will like. he plays the game and stays within the lines like a good boy.
coffeezilla's probably the only person in the world who can use a skull emoji in a tweet and still be taken seriously
CoffeeZilla is the only UA-cam channel besides Muta and Charlie I can trust.
@@Mandate_of_Heaven factual
@Microwave (Ik stypje Ruslân yn 'e oarloch) in the future, bots are indeed capable of *coming*
💀
☠️
It must be stressful to find out a company or service you promote/ed turned out to be scummy. I've seen a few sources I very much enjoy and trust show support for products that turned out to be just that. But, I also do my own research, and I recommend everyone do that when considering investing in anything, no matter who promotes it.
Today's Fact: The world's largest living organism is a fungus in Oregon, which covers over 2,200 acres.
i live in oregon
i knew that (i didnt)
I live in Oregon
Darn I thought it was the meat cave down in dallas
pretty interesting fact, thank you
The most interesting part of these lawsuit details is when something got in Charlie's eye. It is truly a lawsuit of all time.
@@I_NEED_MONEY_ holy shit a dude retaliated to yeaman the rapture is coming
@@Bloxxify1 Bold of you to assume I'm a man
@@I_NEED_MONEY_ bold of you to assume im a human
why, I COULD be YeaMan!
Honestly I think they deserve it. They like to be called experts and give out "financial advice", so they can handle being sued for advising people in investing into a scam. I hope they'll actually end up paying a good amount of money over this, even if it's just legal fees.
You see they don’t though. They usually say something or show something that says they aren’t professionals and contact a cpa which most people don’t 🤷🏽♂️
@@eddiee.832 Imagine shilling for millionaires on the internet lol
even if some people dont actually get sued they'll always be known as someone who almost got sued for 1 billion dollars
CHARLIE COMMENTED ON MY NEWEST VIDEO!
@@DxrkArtz Thats Cool, But Who Tf Asked?
@Did ⸜⁄ I Scrolled Into All The Comments On This Video, And I Yet To Find Anyone Who Asked
@@Festive-Kentasid09 Didn't ask
@@Festive-Kentasid09 Why Do You Type Like This?
Charlie is the only one that can make fun of the biggest things and never get sued hes just too powerful
NPC comment
He is just very objective he doesn’t really input his opinion on serious things he just states the facts most the time atleast
@@AudazVerdugo Unless it's sneako 😂
Technically it's not deliberately making fun of it. If he were to ACTUALLY gaslight then that's when a lawsuit spawns in
i was late beating the bots to responding to this lol
One thing we should remember is that broadcasting companies have teams to handle laws and PR, UA-cam is now giving the average person the ability to broadcast but as evident by the lawsuits, UA-camrs don't understand a lot of the laws around this stuff
Why did I instantly imagine Shaq hiding behind that small ass tree when Charlie said he was hiding lmaooo.
:0 strauss!
This lawsuit is going to be a waste of everyone’s goddamn time.
Yep, but only a waste of time for people I don't care about, so I wish them all the best in their dumpster fire!
You’re weird bro
Fr, no one had prior knowledge of their financials… no one would have had that info besides higher ups @ FTX & Alameda Research…FTX was assumed trustworthy because of their large client base as well as partnerships with MLB, Brady etc
more importantly money
atleast they be know for getting sued and some money for the lawyers
I do think this all brings up a very important thing that UA-camrs (in general) need to figure out. Which is how much do you need to know about your sponsor. We've seen over the past year or so, quite a few controversies over UA-camrs promoting scams, like Established Titles etc.. Obviously Charlie considers this, as he usually only promotes his own ventures, something he knows very well about. I do think it's an important issue that does need to be addressed, especially as more UA-camrs rely on sponsors.
I always appreciate it when Charlie reads me bedtime stories.
@Logan Floor: Pedo Exposer ⸜⁄ no
Like Keanu Reeves Audiobook reading?
I do this for real, very calming voice
nothing like internet drama, crime, or car chases to put you to sleep!
It's always safe to be skeptical, as a viewer and as a content creator with a sponsorship. Do the research, and you can avoid losing money. I appreciate people like you and Coffeezilla putting information out there for the rest of us to be able to understand and learn from.
CHARLIE COMMENTED ON MY NEWEST VIDEO!
Just like in L.A Noire… 🤫🤫🤫
@@DxrkArtz Who Tf Asked?
Exactly, which is why I don’t think the UA-camrs who did sponsorships should feel personal guilt for those who lost all their money, they couldn’t have know what FTX looked like inside and beyond that I can not understand how ANYONE can put their entire life’s worth of money in something, it’s just so baffling to me.
Depends if there’s research out there in the first place. Problem with FTX is that it wasn’t exactly a known fact SBF was embezzling away everyone’s money until he went broke and had to file for bankruptcy, then it became an international story that was investigated. But if you’re a financial channel where your whole gimmick/niche is providing sound financial advice, then isn’t it fair to assume that said financial channel should’ve done their due diligence if they are going to promote/vet a service to invest one’s life’s savings or retirement portfolios with???
This is a really tough situation though because everyone and I mean EVERYONE was pushing crypto sponsors. Not just financial advice channels but you had a lot of podcast, news channels, random goofy comedy stuff, etc. And if you’re a regular viewer/subscriber and see someone you routinely watch (aka an influencer or role model) repeatedly saying invest in crypto today and use my promo code for a free $100 in crypto or one month free trading etc, well now you’ve been influenced to buy this service because the adviser (the UA-cam channel) has promoted it. It’s absolutely funny how one channel I watched at least once a week for several years promoted a crypto service, then FTX Scandal comes to light and suddenly all the crypto promotions are gone and he 180s saying don’t trust crypto cause it’s not a better currency 🤦🏻♂️
But the flip side is, yeah you don’t HAVE to buy something because a celeb or whatever says to. That’s be like suing Shaq because he used to have an endorsement with Oreos and so you bought Oreos all the time and now have diabetes. Is that a fair lawsuit? Probs not (although in America one thing will get thrown out while a different judge will take a very similar case and try it very seriously).
Point is, whole situation is a Crapshoot 🤷🏻♂️
Even if the lawsuit goes nowhere, it’s hopefully going to show everyone much more clearly now that financial UA-camrs aren’t all knowing and that the things they promote may be things they don’t believe in but just promote because they’re being paid to.
Charlie just roasts the shit out of everyone with a straight face.
and I love it
@@DxrkArtz Thats Cool, But Who Tf Asked?
@Don't Read My Profile Photo Who Was Gonna Read Your Name In The First Place?
@@Festive-Kentasid09 why do u capitalize every single word
@@Mandate_of_Heaven Thats Just How I Type-
7.
"They can't charge me if they don't see me." -Shaq, probably
10:30 literally their response "I feel bad they're irresponsible" boils down to "don't trust me or my advice". He gave the worst possible response, doubling down on the idea that their word isn't to be trusted and can be easily paid for.
Charlie: “These UA-camrs are getting sued for $1 billion”
Everyone: *“This is the greatest lawsuit of all time”*
The fact that these youtubers didn't ask how FTX was able to offer such high returns just for keeping your money there shows how little they care about their audience.
Genuinely thought he said worth less than the gun stuck under your school desk 0:45
Even under dust attack from the enemy, he still does his duty with courage
I love how he basically said that people are stupid for trusting his advice.
It’s a big difference between advising and advertising tho, the guy that said that was advertising FTX.
@@oskarekelund1476 yes but he was a financial advisor advertising ftx. He technically has plausible deniability because he can say it was just an advert but at the end of the day ftx only paid him specifically because he had an audience who listened to him on other financial matters. He wasn’t just another famous person, he was targeted because of his credibility for general financial advice.
@@dravidianking1298 in his videos advertising FTX he did say that crypto is a risky investment and that IF you are going to invest then you should only put a small amount of you portfolio in to FTX.
He didn’t tell them go and invest right now this is 100% safe, what more can he do then telling them that crypto is risky and that they only should put in money that they can afford to loose?
If an adult invest money because they saw an ad and the investment fails then he is responsible for his investment, not the one advertising.
It would be different if he paid a financial expert to manage his money and invest it, then the investor would have to take some accountability, but to blame a youtuber that made ads is childish in my eyes.
@@dravidianking1298 Being a financial advisor is irrelevant, theres no legal basis to sue 3rd party paid promoters for a paid promotion because the CEO of the promoted business turned out to be a fraud, would you support suing tech youtubers for promoting NORD VPN if it turns out to be stealing user info? of course not, because its not their fault or responsibility.
@@oskarekelund1476It actually wouldn't be different for a financial advisor unless you can prove they misled you, lied, or invested your money with too much risk. Proving that last point is difficult because all investment is speculation. If your advisor dumped all of your money into FTX you'd probably have a lawsuit, but if they put say 10% in you'd really have no recourse for getting that money back.
I appreciate Charlie demonstrating good academic integrity by constantly citing coffeezilla 😹
coffeezillas a good source tho
He's genuinely one of the best investigative journalists out there at the minute
@@KavsLockedOutFactually correct
Coffee and Charlie are such a power duo
Oh God. The Fan art.
really happy with the change in content these past few months. No more straight rips from the stream and more effort put into the videos
10:45 Yeah, that's what I was thinking is that the only way the lawsuit has much standing in court is if they could prove that the UA-camrs had prior knowledge and coordination of the scam. But it may depend on the judge/jury. The one thing that is certain is the UA-camrs are going to lose at least thousands of dollars each to legal fees if a court decides to take the case, regardless of outcome.
Can always count on Charlie to keep us up to date with the Internet drama
First Charlie completely obliterates what remaining online career Sneako had in a matter of four tweets, and then next thing he's covering a story about UA-camrs being sued for a billion dollars as if it were any other typical Friday night. Absolute Legend.
Even Sasha Grey covered the Sneako drama and LOL'ed at the way Charlie destroyed Sneako
The more people keep mentioning him in Charlie's comment section, the more popularity he'll get. This is old news, we've moved on.
Sneako who? He must be irrelevant.
@@nikosucksatskating 😑🤐
You can't assume do diligence is done by someone else. Thats LITERALLY what makes it DO diligence. You have to DO your own diligence.
I believe that Bin was possessed by Deadman to warn people about FTX because there’s no way he’ll warn people AGAINST crypto. It’s like Captain America saying Hydra isn’t so bad.
i love how charlie does the springtrap jumpscare at 0:00 every video 😂
"Shaq trying to hide"
A feat impossible for giants.
You know, bringing back dislikes can mitigate these goobers ‘financial advice’ credibility.
I suspect this is why dislikes were actually removed. so corporate propaganda can scam easier. around the time dislikes got removed people were getting more and more vocal about those types of vids
@@immapotato1 This is true. I noticed that the dislike button got removed the moment the White House channel started posting videos with Biden because... you guessed it - they got dislike bombed. And then not even a week later they started considering it. That and corporations, yeah, but we all know governments and corporations go hand in hand.
@@beamed5382 I know man, it's crazy to see someone who can actually use words above a 3rd grade reading level. I bet that's super rare in your life.
@@beamed5382 which word was the big boy word
@@beamed5382 suspect, propaganda, and vocal aren’t big boy words… they’re specific words that mean specific things lmao
At this point, if you're getting crypto scammed, there's really no one else to blame but yourself
Shaq is like the sort of kid in hide and seek who hides in the most obvious spot but doesn’t tell the seeker that they’re ready.
I hope there is justice for the victims of this whole scam
Not likely. This type of shit does not get the happy ending it deserves 9/10 times.
I don't think it's even possible at this point tbh, even if they won the class action, they'll get next to nothing individually
@@Mandate_of_Heaven so we would have to get a miracle if anything for something good to happen, thats rough
@@andreethier816 and im guessing the youtubers themselves making things right for the victims is an option but not one they’d go with im guessing
I mean to be fair nobody forced them to do this. I work very hard for my money and I will never invest money in what a youtuber is selling. Just gotta have some common sense.
It's sadly simple: You can't sue a TV channel whose Ad got you to buy to buy crap. Or an investment firm and their employee's, if they give you a shit advice. The UA-camrs fall into the same category. They were promoting something but the final decision was still on the individuals, as was doing their due diligence and research. Especially when it comes to investing in something you know NOTHING about. DON'T, simple as. If you know nothing of a market, don't invest volatile money, unless you're prepared for the possible losses. Finally, unless they can prove that their ties to FTX was more than just a business arrangement for promotions, they will loose the lawsuit.
very very different. tv channels have zero say on what commercials are played. youtube channels choose their sponsors
I'm late to this, but there is a caveat to that: Investment firms, brokerages, and brokers are *licensed*. And giving financial advice *without* a license is, in the US at least, generally quite illegal. If you encourage investing, or call yourself an 'investment advisor' or similar, and you're not licensed? In the US that's a crime (particularly *if you're being compensated* somehow, either by your clients or by the organization you're talking up). One with a maximum penalty of one-hundred fifty thousand dollars and up to one-hundred fifty years in prison.
@@patrickharrington9394 Sure but in most cases, they don't really sell. They just let their followers sheep mentality kick in. They don't even need to flaunt it, upsell it, just the "They named it" is enough to see a LOT of people just buy and get into they know nothing about.
Going to UA-cam for financial advice is like going to your dentist for an STD.
1 billion is a crazy amount for suing.
Dr. Evil: "One billion dollars..."
*Everyone in the room gasps.*
It’s refreshing to see Charlie go more in depth on camera about the situation as opposed to showing clips from his stream. I like this.
If a scammer or a company are sued or fined for less than what they made then that's just a way for them to get away with most of the money. They should always be fined or sued for more that what they made.
I like going back to older videos from Charlie, and admiring the transition of this room
"A broken clock is right twice a day"
I couldn't have said it better myself.
It's ironic that they only correctly predicted the movement of the crypto market as it was beginning to crash.
It’s wild to me. I don’t even put full faith on UA-camrs and their video game reviews. But there’s people ready to sink their lives on their words lol.
Right? Absolutely bonkers.
Ikr. Unfortunately there are horrible people who will exploit gullible people.
I’m pretty fucking sick of original comments being vandalized by bots. It’s sickening.
I see you fighting the good fight man! ✊
You shouldn't be able to sue somebody who talks you into a risky investment unless it's a scam and they know it's a scam.
if Charlie ever gets sued it’s ok because he knows how mags work in his gun
It's an interesting sort of wealth when you own nothing but lose everything.
Legal Eagle is laughed at by almost every other lawyer on UA-cam because his accuracy rate is lower than minimum wage.
5:24 "even broken clock is right twice a day" bro this wisdom, this line was so fricking good
that's like a commonly used saying lmao
The gains are personal, the losses are mutual! It feels like this is what is happening currently
Somewhere in between a paid celebrity endorsement, which is just an employee doing a job, or Mint Mobile being pitched by the celebrity owner... is an 'influencer' who should know better as they are manipulating paid subscribers. Just like pump and dump stock schemes, these advocates are pushing sales of suspect financial products without the credentials or disclaimers required... and should be held financially accountable for the damage they did.
They’re finally all getting what they deserve
ok what about the people who didn't know anything shady was going on until everything came to light, and only promoted it because on the surface it seemed legit
You know things are getting serious when Shaq is bunkering down in his house.
I've just noticed in this video that the Godslap posters in the background are off centre and I can't unsee it...
💀💀now I cant unsee this
Now that's the only thing I can see
If one lost money due to listening to a UA-camr, they shouldn't be allowed to sue.
“This is not financial advice” is not a magic spell that gets rid of all responsibility
even if it is financial advice, i don't think it would still go anywhere because otherwise Jim Cramer would be sued constantly
In fact, if a quick reading of the IAA (the Investment Advisers Act of 1940) is anything to go by, it doesn't get rid of *any* responsibility (in the US, anyway). Zero. None. If any of the people who were talking up FTX, Celsius, or any other major name in Crypto lost investors money, the words 'this is not financial advise' are about as legally relevant as a roll of toilet paper. And the ones who were *compensated* for doing so are as protected by those words as the cardboard tube of that same roll if it were at the bottom of the ocean.
Unless they were licensed, of course. But licensed investment advisers have no reason to put those words on their advise, so safe to say they probably weren't.
man i love that they're all being called out now, as they should no one who promoted this BS should feel safe.
In all reality, I do hope there is some sort of accountability for shilling financial companies out to influencers.
Why?
"These are some really big, recognizable names"
- literally haven't heard of any of these goobers in my wholeass life
i love when charlie wakes up and does the thing where he goes up and does the thing
Let’s be real. The only thing Shag can crouch behind is Sneakos love for Cuties
Allowing a case like this to be heard will set a huge precedent. Imagine every paid advertiser being held responsible for the product they promote(d) ?
I will never get over him showing those guns absolute power play
Right?
@TheNerdy Lad 0/10
It seems like youtubers are always getting sued or suing
I feel like this is what happened with Logan Paul. Logan didn’t do enough research on how the ideas his partners were purposing.
Thank you for being you moist!
The worst part is that 39.8 million was put into Democrat super PACs. 2nd largest individual donor = illegally obtained money. lol
Also, Legal Eagle has a bias toward Democrats.
I heard about Shaq hiding and some scam. Didn’t know the scam was this big in terms of money
"The lawsuit has gone public. They're going to withdraw it now, right?" Bitboy Crypto, probably. 😂
Charlie: Talking about something extremely serious. Bots: I love how he never disappoints us with his content.
They've found you too
Seems a bit hypocritical my friend. 🤓☝🏽
“I make better content” bots have been summoned.
@Detector ⸜⁄ shut up
quite ironic
It is less of broken clock right twice and more of a broken clock seller pointing their rivals have broken clocks
Yeah, this lawsuit may not even go anywhere passed the initial phase but damn it all, if it does make it to trial, let it be the wildest fucking court-case of all time.
Me personally, i wouldn't take that
Same fr
There's just such a huge issue right now where anyone on platforms like this can say or do anything with absolutely zero consequences, with exceptions for a limited number specific things which would get the platform itself in legal trouble (or trouble with advertisers, or when an incident gains a massive amount of negative publicity.
Charlie needs to do youtuber being sued moist meter/tier list
suing finance UA-camrs over this is like suing beauty gurus if the product didn't work.
not rlly, u don’t lose all ur money and livelihood if a makeup product doesn’t work
@@lukesnackwalker Don't trust random ppl on UA-cam, and you'll be fine.
You can. That would be false advertising suits assuming the beauty gurus were promoting the product. It’s just that makeup is a lot cheaper than crypto, so no one will actually sue.
Actually pretty sure a beauty youtuber who shilled blue light protective skin cream I think it was got into legal trouble
@@lukesnackwalker that depends on how much you spend
Charlie will use any synonym to describe money except “Dollars”
His favorites seem to be “Dabloons” and “Clams”
I would never trust the word of any goddamn UA-camr as gospel - love you, Charlie - regardless of how much they demonstrated expertise in a subject. UA-camrs are, first and foremost, entertainers. Their credentials are, essentially, whatever the hell they say they are. While I do feel like these particular UA-camrs are scumbags, and I don't really feel that bad for them having to fight a frivolous lawsuit... the fact of the matter is, their viewers judgement is sorely lacking, and they are at majority fault for basically taking these clowns at their word.
💯
In case you guys didn’t know: Tom Nash and Coffeezilla have always been friends, Now they’re against each other. Quite a sad reality :(
A great example of this is Jonny Harris. People always sooking that his stories are historically inaccurate. He never claims they are dead accurate and people just don’t understand that he is a friggen entertainment UA-camr not a historian/scholar
Well said, The larger youtube channels make many times more money per month than us working plebs. They may claim they are like us but the info is there that proves otherwise. This is why I never donate cash to anyone but instead give hard goods to local charities such as pet food to animal shelters or clothing to good will.
@@fredsilva7274 if only more people thought like you instead of worshipping other humans as gods for the dumbest things.
Could the issue be that we're letting UA-camrs convince us that they're financial experts when at best, most of them are people who got lucky financially who also know how to make videos? We've seen the stock market, housing market and crypto market do some wild shit in the last few years and I genuinely don't believe that anyone knew for sure what was going on the whole time
The worse part is that with this going to court is it will be the poster boy not to adopt crypto as the dollar. Unless its ran by the goverment
Day 23 of begging Charlie to fix the crooked Godslap poster
Hope you're doing good, Charlie. You deserve to be happy.
@Detector ⸜⁄ ratiooo
@Don't Read My Profile Photo ratiooo
Npc comment
???? Random ass comment.
@_LoganFloorYou are a 🤡.
That's why influencers and content creators should always be honest and disclose when they're being paid to promote products and services. That way they can't be held accountable for things like this.
charlie is the type of person who cant get cancelled of things that he sayss
Bunch of meat guzzlers in the comments
And when they do, they fail.
Probably because he doesn’t say dumb shit
Then again he hardly says stuff that warrant cancellation (which is a good thing)
Man that's crazy, i wish we had regulation in place to help with this. 😢
We already do?
That's what SBF and his father were trying to do with all the cpntributions to democrats and cozying up to Gessner. But, he wanted them to only allow FTX in the US and outlaw Binance. Meanwhile he was stealing everyone's money and hoping for a government bailout if FTX became a regulated security exchange.
@@scottulrich2725 Can you explain this to me like I'm 11 y/o?
@@ghost-user559Well it's not fucking working
@@popsicIes basically sbf was giving big monies to US government officials to try to get them to make ftx (and only ftx) more official and secure. So in the scenario where ftx goes broke, the government can bail them out.
That exact situation has happened a couple of days ago with Silicon Valley bank and a few others
When I think of Shaq hiding. I think of the meme of him hiding behind that small tree.
Charlie you are the best youtuber in my opinion you don’t just bring the content but you bring your message of what u have to say on certain topics. Thank you 🙏🏾. You are an inspiration to me and others.
@P bro do you not get bored doing this. Also why keep trying when it clearly doesn't work, you get no likes or views, and you're among literally thousands of other people trying. I'm genuinely curious here, why do you do it and what do you think you'll achieve?
get off your knees lil bro
@@Benbenbenbenbenn dont waste your time feeding the troll
@@p-__ Is your comment a cry for help? Are you depressed or something?
@TheNerdy Lad Maybe later.
Suing the endorsers is like suing McDonald's employees because you didn't like the food.
That is a shitty analogy. It is more like suing mcdonald's for serving you coffee at an extremely high temperature and leading to you having your labia fucking fused to your thighs.