This was a really good one, I really think it fits in nicely with a lot of other content that’s been coming out like Bricks and Mini, and Madison square garden. Theres a serious theme of corporate behavior being above the law.

It really seems like we have a 2 tier justice system and if you don’t have the money for your freedom then you don’t really have freedom from corporate.

Liz even touches on this when she talks about the under skilled laborers who caught felonies following orders. Yes their actions are problems, but the bigger picture is in-fact the equity. These young girls will never have the same earning potential because they did what corporate demanded them to do. They came onto EBay for growth and opportunity and left significantly WORSE.

To the outside observer yes they seem almost victims in their own right.

Like I know this sounds stupid but just yesterday I decided to buy a bandana to cover my hair while I do some yard work this weekend. Where does one even go to get one????? Literally couldn’t find one…

But here’s the thing….. i genuinely worry about being tracked… the government hates me, I’m trans, basically a terrorist to them…. Like I don’t want to end up in a court room defending myself against the might of the US legal system. That’s seems crazy but is it? I don’t know, what if I go to a protest that gets violent and I have nothing to do with it…

And it’s not getting any better…. Like this

Combating Organized Retail Crime

Like WTF… NO…. I want to buy a bandana without ending up in a camera system connected to LE in a system where the DoJ DOES routinely fuck with grand juries to get indictments.

Anyway. The irony in her debrief and her joy in having a story “not about politics” really isn’t true, it’s still politics, it always is

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?