To be fair, it's not like dabblefags weren't already amply warned by lawtube months ago about this cheap deadbeat stiffing all his colleagues as a matter of course...
Well, the thing there, admittedly, is that Lawtube has nothing in writing.
On the one hand, given they are lawyers, they
really should have insisted on a profit sharing deal in writing. They're kinda dumb for not doing that. Especially with the amount of money Nick was pulling in on those panel shows.
On the other hand though, that doesn't mean Nick still didn't take advantage of them.
Both things can be true.
I paid you in exposure!
Okay, well, now that your channel is such dogshit that even Kurt can pull better numbers than you, nobody owes you shit, Nick. Suffer, bish.
Anyways, if I'm being honest, I would argue John DiCaprio has a better claim here. Even if he's a dabbletard, a deal is a deal. Nick put out the bounty. John delivered. Nick just confirmed it.
If Nick doesn't pay up, I agree with Mustang that John might actually have a pretty decent small claims case here.
Congo was savaged by critics, but damn if it didn't have some witty dialogue at points.