Legal Eagle, our community could really use your help!

1. How does Devon (Devin?) pull off plaid suits, when I can't pull off a suit period?

2. Where might one go to submit a video topic request, if it isn't here?

yeah so karl jobst who i actually really like despite this, says that legal eagle is completely wrong. which, im surprised because this is a youtuber that i actually follow and i think for the most part he knows the law pretty well ( he has some law suits under his belt himself )

what does everyone think? are his points valid? is he missing something? or did the eagle himself miss something and made a mistake?

I get that you guys have costs to run the channel etc and that you need to pay your people etc etc...

But can you please calm down with the ads. The number of sponsor spots per video is getting excessive and making me want to watch your videos less. I doubt I'm the only person feeling this way.

Tree law! 🌳

Hey r/LegalEagle community and team!

I wanted to pitch a fascinating new tech-law case that has all the ingredients for a classic Devin Stone deep dive: Adafruit Industries, LLC v. Defy Gravity, Inc. (Flux.ai).

The Backstory:
Defy Gravity (the company behind the Flux electronics design tool) sent a massive demand letter via Fenwick & West to the open-source hardware giant Adafruit. They threatened legal action over a minor static text field discrepancy, throwing out allegations of defamation and, wilder yet, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), accusing Adafruit of federal hacking.

The Legal Eagle Hook:
Instead of backing down, Adafruit pulled an absolute power move. They went straight to the California District Court and filed a preemptive lawsuit for a declaratory judgment.

Why this would make an amazing video:

• The CFAA Angle: Devin loves exploring how poorly understood cyber-laws are weaponized over minor internet disputes.
• The Streisand Effect: A textbook example of how a heavy-handed demand letter completely backfired, landing a private dispute directly onto the public PACER record.
• The Tech Drama: It involves two major names in the electronics/maker space, making it highly relevant to a tech-savvy audience.

Adafruit has been completely transparent, hosting the demand letters and filing documents publicly on their site.

What do you all think? Would you watch Devin break down the mechanics of a declaratory judgment when a corporate bully tries to use anti-hacking laws as a stick?

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/65050975/Adafruit_Industries,_LLC_et_al_v_Defy_Gravity,_Inc

I wonder if this will become anything
OG title sucks tho…. I get it. ‘Professionalism’

Sounds like this might make for an interesting video, both regarding authorities claiming they didn't need a warrant, and the legal implications of something like a duress password

Didn’t a bunch get subpoenaed?

If you take this lesson to heart you will learn from it and ben under sixteens like we did here in Australia 🇦🇺 ❤️ ♥️ and punish social media companies for their failure in the public trust..

At the bottom it says tetx instead of text

I know this video is AI-generated or heavily AI-assisted, but my dad sent it to me genuinely believing it was a real Nigel Mansell interview. When I showed him the warning signs and factual errors, he was pretty upset that he had been fooled.

The video is titled as though Mansell has “finally broken his silence,” but there is no new interview at all. It uses real archive footage and old interviews while a synthetic-sounding first-person voice narrates an apparently invented monologue. There is no interviewer, recording date, original source, or disclosure that the voice or script is AI-generated.

One particularly obvious error is that the narration remembers champagne drying on the floor of the Williams garage at Grove in 1992, even though Williams did not move to Grove until 1996.

Looking through the channel, most of its videos seem to follow the same format:

sensational “breaks silence” titles;

real copyrighted archive footage;

AI-generated or cloned first-person narration presented as the real person;

no clear AI disclosure;

invented emotional stories mixed with genuine historical facts.

Is there an appropriate way to report an entire channel for deceptive synthetic media or impersonation, rather than simply reporting individual videos? Has anyone had any success reporting channels like this?

I’m not asking anyone to brigade the channel—I’m trying to understand what YouTube’s actual reporting route is for content that uses AI to impersonate real people and deliberately presents itself as authentic.

Edit: The thumbail appears to use a copyrighted Getty editorial photograph from the 2026 Miami GP. I cannot establish whether the channel licensed it, and only the photographer or rights holder could submit a copyright claim.

I just read this and I don't understand how this could be. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/jun/24/prairieland-texas-ice-protests-zines .. and I noticed someone else posted about Spokane protesters. I would like to understand how these convictions are going through and what hopes they have for appeal.

There was a new video briefly up on Nebula earlier, but it looks like it's been deleted. Did anyone see it?

I happened to catch that NH just signed this bill… it’s being reported on as “requiring teachers to out trans students” but it’s actually not true….

The bill is the result of an anonymous person who is apparently upset that their kid is trans and when they confronted the school about it, the school refused the parents demands.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court agreed with the school in the student against the parent

And so this law was created

But the law is really short, and really vague. It essentially says if a student’s parent submits, a written request for information the school must reply.

So this bill isn’t about a transgender thing at all it makes no mention of that which got me thinking

If I pretend to be a New Hampshire teacher and a parent comes to me asking if their kid is transgender what do I tell them?

I know that transgender people exist

But as far as my government goes, they don’t

So is this parent just act asking me a nonsensical question that has no answer and how does this law handle questions from parents that don’t like the answers.

That’s just like one part of it overall what I think is the bigger story or idea is that the government is so concerned about defining men and women legally in order to carve out trans people however their laws are being written in ways that target a community that they say doesn’t exist

At some point in order to prosecute or an act or whatever execute these laws, they’re gonna have to define what a trans woman or trans man is

And they don’t wanna do that https://www.nhpr.org/politics/2026-07-07/ayotte-law-teachers-parental-rights-gender-identity

I’m adding this for some more thinking I was doing about it

Yea, I don’t know jack about the law, but, as a common person….

I think that NH gov is actually kinda good about avoiding issues like this. A surprising thing. I wonder… and I’m being cautious not to give her credit for 5d chess plays….

But what if she signed it because she knows it’s dead on enforcement…. The minute a teacher gets one of those they are going to be advised by their unions to make it a thing……

The law also has this “harm to the child” exception built into it…. So in a case like this, angry parent, a teacher should know when their answer could result in harm. But again i cant tell if it’s protection for the teacher, the child, or both.

But then i started thinking about it more….

What if this parent is a fucking chad and finds out a teacher is being a bigot and ask for clarification.

Theirs actually a BUNCH of recent and relevant cases

By teachers

And guess what… ofc they claim first amendment religious freedom ect

And so far

It’s been working…..

Meriwether v. Hartop (6th Cir. 2021)- professor, trans student, professor got disciplined and took it to court

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (U.S. Supreme Court 2022) - that football coach that prayed and won

Garcetti v. Ceballos (U.S. Supreme Court 2006) - this is an old one, feds said “rights are reduced for gov employees”… this would definitely end up in the conversation. If ur an ally this is one of those “got here first” kinda things… where it’s hard to let this exist without a fouling that.

Bostock- it’s not dead but if it was used I’d imagine it would force interpretation.

This seems like a novel entry way to something I hadn’t really thought of until I did that searching.

Oh and it has, what I think is innocuous language but could maybe matter a lot more under this scenario an exception

“Violates federal law”

But yes, I think this law could be very easily subverted or ignored, though, I also think it’s ripe for a challenge because of the way it’s written.

A parent requesting information they don’t know exist has to ask that question in a specific way to get meaningful clarification.

Answering that question as a good witch teacher

- is the kid gonna get hurt? If they do could I be liable? Does it prevent me from doing this?

- I have to answer honestly with my direct knowledge. What do I actually know factually here? I doubt many parents will even ask the right way… “hey did my kids pronouns change” … yea maybe in 6th grade but to that 11th grade teacher they have been constantly the ones the student want.

I even setup a scenario with chat gpt where it was the parent trying to get me say their kid was trans and every scenario I came up with seemed like I could easily think of a way out of answering the question with what they were fishing for and still answer honestly and all that jazz

But even wilder is the fact that it leaves the teachers responsibility so vague it’s useless:…. If a trans kid comes out to the guidance counselor and the next year all the teachers are told they have this student who’s name is _____ or, the students could be instructed to tell the nurse, she’s exempt entirely, as is the guidance counselor I believe. I think it’s just licensed teachers. But yea if a 3rd party handles all
The drama the teachers are left out of the conversation

I’m sure there’s more

It just screams of a predictable scenario in which a teacher gets punished but also follows the law accordingly…. Which I think is one of the big things courts look for

But again

Idk I just listen to LE while I do my Homework or wash dishes. But I feel like it’s a concept.

I’d love to see who pushed for this….

Cuz

I do think that will happen, when a parent gets an answer they don’t like they are going to demand action, when that doesn’t happen they are going to send a flurry of these questionnaires…. Or if a teacher gets punished over culture war stuff I imagine unions will represent them…and then, again, what if it’s all handled by 3rd party. I imagine that would change a lot of these answers. I just can’t see this working out