On June 25, 2020, in Provo, Utah, The Vlog Squad, a group of multi-talented, YouTube creators, set out on another content creation adventure. That day, however, ended with one member in the hospital with life-threatening injuries. Today, on Trellis Documents in Depth, we look at the complaint filed by Jeffrey Wittek against David Dobrik, et al.
Content Creation Context
Online spaces are virtual playgrounds on which creators often push boundaries for views, clicks, and likes. However, this drive for views and virality has led some content creators to engage in dangerous stunts that put their lives at risk and endanger others.
In June 2022, Jeffrey Wittek filed a complaint for damages stemming from personal injury against defendants David Dobrik, David Dobrik LLC, and Dirt Gear Co. LLC. The complaint alleges negligence, intentional tort, and property damage. The case has been assigned to the Honorable Judge David M. Crowley of the Los Angeles County Superior Court.
In the first cause of action for general negligence, the complaint alleges that David Dobrik, individually and on behalf of David Dobrik LLC, leased an excavator from Dirt Gear Co. LLC without receiving proper training or instruction on its use. Dobrik then used the excavator in an unsafe manner, swinging people around on a rope attached to the excavator. According to the complaint, despite warnings from others, Dobrik continued this unsafe activity and instructed the plaintiff, Jeffrey Wittek, to get on the rope. When Dobrik slowed down the excavator too quickly, Wittek’s momentum slowed down, and he struck the excavator, resulting in multiple severe injuries. The complaint seeks $10,000,000 in general damages and includes a request for exemplary damages against Dobrik, David Dobrik LLC and co-defendant, Dirt Gear Co., as they are alleged to have engaged in malice and fraud.
Legal Ramifications of Reckless Content Creation
As demonstrated by the case above, engaging in dangerous stunts for content creation opens up a host of legal issues. Creators can face charges ranging from public endangerment and trespassing to more serious criminal charges if their actions result in harm or property damage. Additionally, victims of these stunts, including participants and bystanders, have grounds to sue for damages. Creators must understand that viral fame cannot shield them from legal accountability and the real-world consequences of their actions.
The Employment Status Quagmire of Content Creators
One of the interesting points in the Wittek-Dobrik case and similar causes of action is how content creators occupy a unique position in the labor market. Sometimes, they are not considered traditional employees or contractors but independent entities who earn income based on the content they produce and the audience they attract. This nebulous status complicates insurance, liability, and worker protection matters. See, for example, Clubhouse Media Group, Inc.’s complaint against Defendant Leslie Golden for slander, libel, violations of the UCL, and breach of contract. Without the safety net that comes with traditional employment, creators like David Dobrik may be personally liable for any legal issues arising from their content. This lack of precise classification further muddies the waters regarding responsibility and accountability, both legally and ethically.
Navigating the Risks Responsibly
Not only do dangerous stunts like the one in our case at hand directly threaten the creators and participants, but they can also endanger unsuspecting bystanders. The consequences of such stunts are not limited to physical harm; they can also have long-lasting psychological effects on the actors and the audience, especially young viewers who might be inclined to emulate such behavior, thereby perpetuating a cycle of dangerous content creation.
Indeed, on March 21 of this year, eightify. app posted videos from YouTube creator community members, commenting on tragic consequences allegedly linked to the popular creator, who goes by the name Mr. Beast, stating “[a] 17-year-old boy’s death while climbing a Los Angeles bridge for a social media stunt and a five-year-old boy killed in a Lamborghini crash during a YouTube challenge underscore the life-threatening risks of imitating online stunts.”
The digital landscape offers unprecedented opportunities for creativity and expression. However, as evidenced by the Wittek v. Dobrik case, content creators must now balance the pursuit of engagement with a sense of responsibility and awareness of the potential impacts of their actions.
Interested in obtaining documents pertaining to social media cases?
Check out Trellis! Trellis is an AI-driven, state trial court research and analytics platform. We make the fragmented U.S. state trial court system searchable through a single interface, offering comprehensive insights into judges, cases, and opposing counsel. Effortlessly track lawsuits across states and stay updated with ongoing litigation documents. Request a demo today and elevate your legal practice with our intuitive analytics and API.
Trellis Documents:
Judge Bio:
https://trellis.law/judge-dashboard/1927/bio
Other Sources:
Music: Big O of No! by Anka Mason
Blog Narration: Anka Mason
