A Dogecoin investor has stepped up to file a legal complaint against Elon Musk.

While the lingering crypto winter The conversations about the crypto landscape are rampant in locations like Wall Street and Art Basel, yet one particular narrative resurfaced last week, encapsulating the fundamental themes of the situation. 

On Thursday, it was announced that the former ‘Dogefather’ and currently the richest private individual on the planet Elon Musk will be held accountable under U.S. law following a class action lawsuit lodged in downstate New York, which includes the whole NYC area. This federal complaint asserts that Musk has been running a pyramid scheme through his ongoing involvement with the infamous cryptocurrency Dogecoin.

Keith Johnson–a purported An individual dubbed a 'billionaire investor'—whose complete narrative is not yet fully illuminated—filed the lawsuit on June 16, utilizing the legal expertise of the Evan Spencer Law firm in Manhattan on behalf of all individuals involved Dogecoin investors who are collectively pursuing a staggering $258 billion in damages. 

The filing states, 'Johnson is seeking $86 billion in damages, which reflects the decrease in Dogecoin's market value since May 2021, and he aims for this amount to be tripled.' Reuters In addition, 'He seeks to stop Musk and his businesses from promoting Dogecoin and hopes a judge will declare that trading Dogecoin constitutes gambling under both federal and New York law.'

According to the 'Claims for Relief' segment of the official court document case known as Johnson v. Musk et al., filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 22-05037, it notes that 'the class is so large that joining all members in one action is impractical.' If the court finds the defendants liable, members of the class will be identified 'through crypto exchanges, the Dogecoin blockchain , and voluntary disclosure.”

As outlined in the official court document, Dogecoin was introduced to the market in 2013 by founders Billy Markus and Jackson Palmer, starting at a price of $0.0002. 'Markus publicly stated that Dogecoin was created as a joke, relying 99.99% on the 'greater fool theory.' This theory suggests that Investopedia one can profit from buying overpriced assets because there’s likely someone (a 'greater fool') willing to pay an even higher price.'

However, Johnson is not targeting the founders in this lawsuit. Instead, he is going after Musk, who only became involved with Dogecoin in 2019—once cryptocurrency had truly entered the mainstream consciousness—and after an online polling crowned Musk as the de facto 'CEO' of Dogecoin. In fact, Johnson's intentions extend beyond holding Musk accountable—his complaint also implicates Musk's companies, SpaceX and Tesla Inc . as parties. 

In the legal documentation, a detailed exposition consisting of ninety compelling arguments highlights a direct link between Musk’s notorious tweets and the fluctuations in Dogecoin's value. 

One key example presented in point 73 discusses a tweet where Musk humorously proposed to 'eat a happy meal on television if @McDonalds accepts Dogecoin.' The document indicates that 'While this playful offer was not agreed upon, the price of Dogecoin surged from $0.14 to $0.15 within a day (an 8% uptick) due to the tweet.'

The 'Statement of Facts' section culminates in three vital findings. Initially, it claims that Musk took advantage of his social media influence to 'knowingly lead millions of users to invest billions in the Dogecoin Crypto Pyramid Scheme.' Secondly, Musk's interventions inflated Dogecoin's valuation to a peak of $3 trillion during the summer of 2021. Lastly, 'Since that peak, the crypto market has suffered almost $2 trillion in losses, as the total crypto market cap is now around $1 trillion, collapsing after Musk termed cryptocurrency a 'hustle' on Saturday Night Live.'

On May 26, 2022, Musk tweeted about 'Dogecoin Trillionaire, the Movie.' According to the court’s analysis, this tweet 'had no discernible impact on the price, marking a rare first.' Johnson, in turn, 'liquidated his Dogecoin holdings in June 2022 at a rate of $0.08, incurring roughly a 70% loss on his investment.'

I apologize for the order of information in the court documents, but the opening of Johnson’s case asserts a strong stance: 'Dogecoin is neither a currency, stock, nor a security. It holds no backing from gold, precious metals, or anything else… It's merely a fraud uk

Were Johnson and his fellow investors oblivious to this from the beginning? Are they not equally culpable for the reckless speculation Musk led them towards? What prompted Johnson to delay selling his Dogecoin when the obvious relationship between its worth and Musk's misleading statements was so clear? Would this lawsuit even exist if the narrative unfolded differently—if all investors reaped the wealth their former leader had promised? If the trial moves forward, it may shed light on these pressing questions.

Certain tweets highlighted in the 'Statement of Facts' suggest Musk was pushing Dogecoin holders to divest their holdings, implying ill intent meant to serve only his self-interest. At times, it feels as though this case is less about ethics on a moral level. It seems as if Johnson is disappointed to find himself at the base of the pyramid rather than the apex.

Nevertheless, each judicial ruling sets a precedent, and this situation is a pivotal juncture for vi . To date, Musk and his businesses have refrained from commenting on the litigation. For now, all we can do is patiently await the legal process to unfold. 

vi

• NBA icon Magic Johnson is set to unveil an NFT collection.
• Following a leak of a crypto-related bill on Twitter, Senators have introduced the formal documentation.
• Michael Owen’s comments about his NFT stir significant backlash in advertising.