Logan Paul’s CryptoZoo saga, a venture that promised an innovative NFT game but ultimately failed to deliver, has taken a new turn. In the wake of a class-action lawsuit and mounting criticisms, Paul has initiated a buy-back program for the NFTs. This decision, however, comes with its own set of complexities and controversies.
Originally pitched in 2021, CryptoZoo was marketed as a fun, money-making game involving the collection, breeding, and trading of animal NFTs. The concept was intriguing: each NFT was an egg that would hatch into an animal with varying levels of rarity, which could be bred to produce hybrid animals. The hatching of these eggs was supposed to yield $ZOO tokens, the game’s cryptocurrency, with the value depending on the rarity of the hatched animal. Players were supposed to be able to buy more eggs or cash out with each hatching. Additionally, interactive mini-games and an eventual entry into the metaverse were promised. However, the project unraveled due to issues such as developers quitting over nonpayment, allegations of market manipulation, and the inability of players to breed hatched eggs or cash out.
In response to the debacle and the lawsuit, Paul has now launched a buy-back program, committing over $2.3 million to repurchase Base Egg and Base Animal CryptoZoo NFTs at their original purchase price. This program, however, excludes hybrid animal NFTs and those who held ZOO tokens. Most notably, those who opt for the buy-back must waive any current or future legal claims against Paul and related personnel.
Paul’s strategy is seen as an attempt to minimize potential damages from the class-action lawsuit. By refunding NFTs in exchange for waiving claims, he could individually settle with class members, thus reducing his exposure in the pending case. This move could lead to a more favorable settlement for Paul.
Paul has also filed a cross-claim lawsuit against CryptoZoo’s lead developers, Eduardo Ibanez and Jake Greenbaum, shifting the blame for the project’s failure onto them. He alleges that these co-founders engaged in nefarious activities, including stealing funds and sabotaging the game internally. Despite these claims, Paul maintains that he never profited from the project.
The buy-back program has been met with skepticism by some investors, especially those in the “CryptoZoo Victims” Discord channel, highlighting the ongoing distrust in the community. The program’s terms, particularly the waiver of legal rights, have raised legal concerns among traders.
In conclusion, Logan Paul’s CryptoZoo episode serves as a cautionary tale in the world of NFTs. It underscores the importance of transparency, accountability, and the potential legal ramifications in the burgeoning world of digital assets.
This is a DAO submission authored by James
This article is an individual contribution from a member of the Secret3 DAO and has been approved through our community voting process. The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily mirror the views and policies of the Secret3 platform or the wider DAO community. Secret3 and its DAO community disclaim any responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or validity of the information contained in this article. Readers are encouraged to exercise discernment and to consider the content as the author’s personal insights and opinions.