Crypto News
2 years ago

Crypto Trader Cobie Donates $100K To Youtuber Fighting Bitboy’s Defamation Suit

Chayanika Deka Aug 24, 2022 22:20
Popular cryptocurrency community member and well-known trader, better known for his pseudonym Cobie, donated $100K to a YouTuber who's being sued by Bitboy.

Two prominent YouTube content creators – Erling Mengshoel (aka Atozy) and Ben Armstrong (aka BitBoy Crypto), are at loggerheads over a video made almost a year ago. With the dispute taking a legal turn, Atozy, for one, has found an unexpected ally in popular crypto personality – Cobie.

Cobie, whose real name is Jordan Fish, has come to Atozy’s rescue. To help defend the lawsuit, the UpOnly podcast host has donated $100,000 to the YouTuber.

  • In a brief Twitter thread, Atozy revealed that he is being sued by Armstrong over a video he made in November 2021. In the video titled “This YouTuber scams his fans… Bitboy Crypto,” he accused Bitboy of scamming his followers.
  • It all started when Atozy reportedly came across a video on Bitboy Crypto’s channel that has now been deleted, endorsing a shady project called Pamp network token in 2020. The project was ultimately rug-pulled.
  • It was then Atozy called Bitboy a “shady dirtbag who milks his audience for a quick buck rather than giving them genuine advice.”
  • Armstrong happens to be one of the most-watched crypto influencers on YouTube.
  • As per CNBC report, Armstrong reportedly confirmed accepting payments from crypto companies to promote new products for his subscribers. He also expressed regrets regarding the same as it resulted in losses for his own viewers.
  • This prompted Armstrong to pursue a legal course wherein he claims that Atozy’s video damaged his reputation. Notably, eight months before the defamation lawsuit, Bitboy had also sent cease and desist letter to Atozy.
  • According to the federal complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta, Armstrong accused Atozy of causing “intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, tortious interference with business relations or potential business relations, violation of uniform deceptive practices act, and violation of fair business practices act.”
Share This Article
Chayanika Deka

Chayanika has been working as financial journalist for five years. A graduate in Political Science and Journalism, her interest lies in regulatory implications with a focus on technological evolution in the crypto realm. Contact:Linkedin