Transcript for:
Mr. Beast vs. Mr. Beast Burger Dispute

Mr Beast is suing Mr Beast burger for 10 million dollars who's really to blame for these disgusting Mr beastburgers look gross did Jimmy's viral tweets about beesburger cause his plans to explode because now Beast Burgers counter-suing Mr Beast for 100 million dollars answers to all this and more but first let's do a little background on the rise and fall of Mr Beast burger by taking all the way back to the distant long ago of 2020. you guys remember 2020 watching Tiger King while washing your groceries in the sink all before a night of losing friendships over who was more Susan Among Us Mr Beast Burger launched in 2020 during the beginning of the pandemic by Mr Beast and partner company VDC or virtual dining Concepts while there was briefly one physical store location Mr Beast Burger primarily operates through ghost kitchens a business model where already established restaurants prepared the menu items under a different brand name it also happens to be the title of my new horror comedy pilot about dead chefs ghost kitchens have exploded in popularity as a type of restaurant with no physical location but can be seen on food delivery apps such as doordash or ubereats they became especially popular during the pandemic when restaurants had to close their dining room even Chuck E cheese got in on it by creating Pasquale's Pizza and Wings a ghost Pizza chain completely created to sell delivery pizza when no one could go to the rat directly see that now I don't have to fish my nephew out of a ball pit to get my Chuck E cheese pizza and it's probably a good idea Mr Beast Burger doesn't have a physical location just look at the footage from when they did try to open up one [Applause] so Jimmy starts selling Mr Beast burgers out of ghost kitchens and existing restaurants claiming that this was to help small businesses at a time when restaurants were not doing well financially so Jimmy teamed up with VDC to let them use his brand name and likeness to sell food out of existing restaurants what an admirable cause surely nothing could go wrong right wrong over time people complain that the quality of Mr Beast Burger has taken a massive dive YouTubers like Eddie burback have gone deep investigating deceptive marketing practices ghost kitchens employ and they're calling out creators like Mr Beast for promoting low quality products this doesn't look like a satisfying chicken sandwich I don't know it's so dry surely it can't be that bad oh that was nasty I mean if the definition of edible is that I ate it then it's technically edible so can Mr Beast back out of his business agreement because VDC served food that was too low in quality well we got a copy of his complaint right here so let's find out Jimmy claims that this Mr Beast Burger Fiasco has damaged his brand and his reputation quote many customers believe that Mr Beast is personally responsible for this mess as evidenced by statements such as how could you do this to me Jimmy it doesn't say where they got that quote but poor kid or 35 year old neat most likely in response Jimmy wants to terminate the agreement they had but in order to do that he'll need to prove VDC committed a material breach of contract now what makes something a material breach of contract versus a non-material breach a material breach of contract is a flat out failure to perform your end of the contract and renders the agreement irreparably broken if that's the case Jimmy could simply end the agreement walk into court and try to collect the damages caused by the breach a non-material breach is more like not performing a minor point of the contract and could be chalked up to an oversight something that the breaching party could be made aware of and quickly remedy the situation keeping the contract intact kind of like when you hire a guy to build your house but while he's doing it he accidentally makes one of the pipes leaking so you let him know and he fixes it honest mistake quickly remedied he still gets paid and you still get to use your home that's a non-material breach a material breach is like when you hire a guy to build your home but when he's finished all the stairs are emcee Escher stairs the floor is made of literal lava he had one job and he beefed it I'm not paying him so how do we know if the breach was material we have to see if one party was deprived of the heart of what was bargained for something completely out of the bounds of the agreement here's five things lawyers check for to see if a breach was material number one a reasonable amount of money or effort can't solve the problem for example if I try to go upstairs I'm faced with fifth dimensional horror and also the floor is uninhabitable lava and it'd take at least another year to rebuild and a huge sum of money is completely unreasonable Mike yeah one second in Jimmy's case it would take an unreasonable amount of money and or effort to improve quality control when all these ghost kitchens operate independently from one another plus he claims the damage to his reputation can't be solved by money he claims the only way to remedy the situation is to end Mr beastburger altogether number two the breaching party is unlikely to fix the problem Jimmy claims VDC ignored every call for improvement quote despite numerous objections by Mr Beast whose complaints about quality control fell on deaf ears allegedly Jimmy wanted things to get better but VDC did nothing and kept sending inedible Burgers to disappointed fans kinda like when you beg that guy no Lava but news flash he's obsessed with lava don't hire him he wants to put lava in your house too three if the breach was willful or done in bad faith then it's more likely to be considered a material breach Jimmy claims that BDC only cared about using Mr BEAST's clout to get more celebrity partners for itself while disregarding their responsibilities for Mr burger if his allegations are true then Jimmy may have an argument to revoke the use of his brand and likeness number four the non-breaching party must show that they were ready willing and able to perform their obligations basically even if VDC breached the contract Jimmy still has to hold up his end he claims he did but VDC plays an UNO reverse here they claim Mr Beast not them is the one who really breached the contract but more on that later in the video let's finish this up first with number five sometimes the contract specifically defines what is a material breach I love it when a contract paints a clear picture it makes it so much easier in court but maybe this contract wasn't so thorough unfortunately we don't know what the contract actually says as it wasn't filed with the complaint but based on what the complaint says I can put on my lawyer cap and give you my educated guess on what's probably in there or more specifically what isn't see despite how often it mentions Mr BEAST's damage reputation the complaint doesn't actually cite any specific contract language that reputational damage or poor food quality was a material breach which means it's probably not in the contract let's be real I doubt Jimmy had any control over the quality of the food if the contract gave him any sort of control over that he wouldn't be suing to leave the agreement over dipping quality so let this be a lesson don't sign away your name and your face without having some control over the products it will be on since it's unlikely there's any language that expressly States poor food quality or damage to Jimmy's reputation as a material breach all hope is lost no there's another argument he can make to win it all Mr Beast isn't a quitter his main argument is what US and the lawyer business like to call imply duty of good faith and fair dealing not as catchy as the other one but this is something that generally every contract has even if it's not written into the contract that's why it's implied an implied rule that both parties will deal with each other honestly fairly and won't do anything to get in the way of the other party receiving the benefits of the contract this this is what Jimmy will argue when we entered into this virtual kitchen contract it was obviously implied that you guys would serve quality food no business and certainly not mine sets out to serve poor quality food that angers customers by serving food that was so low quality and at times inedible you have reached the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing and then a court will have to decide if food quality was in fact Incorporated in this implied Duty and also decide how low quality is low enough to be a material breach of the contract and if the court sees these reviews VDC might be in trouble I got food poisoning from Mr Beast the one and only time I ordered from there I don't remember how it was cooked but I sure so far this was the worst Burger I've ever had in reality it's just a brand because the product sucks the barbecue I make in my backyard is better than this burger the first one to finish is raw Burger gets 100K I don't envy that court now selling inedible food is obviously a breach of their contract because we can all agree that no one would enter into a contract effect like this to serve food you cannot eat but Jimmy only points to one instance of the food being genuinely inedible so that's not what's being argued here instead it's that the low quality food is a material breach but Jimmy will also argue you further violated this implied Duty by operating in bad faith you took my name and used it to expand your own brand with other celebrities and expand your own profits and did so at the expense of my brand and its food quality for this you must pay and this contract must be terminated so Jimmy is taking on big ghost kitchen and suing virtual dining concepts for 10 million dollars but wait didn't I say earlier that BDC said Jimmy is a real contract creature here yes I did they claim Mr Beast is being a bully according to BDC the negative reviews come from a minority of their customers and Jimmy's only doing this because he's salty that a previous contract renegotiation didn't go his way alleged when he couldn't negotiate a higher ownership percentage in the company he filed this frivolous lawsuit to undermine the company in the hopes of getting out of his contractual obligations wait are they claiming that Jimmy was acting in bad faith they claimed that some of Jimmy's tweets about Mr beastburger were disparaging and ruined their company's reputation oh God it's a classic Uno reverse you're disparaging my reputation no you're disparaging my reputation well I'm gonna sue you no I'm gonna sue you Mike oh sorry Jimmy posted this tweet about the situation something I wouldn't advise if I was his lawyer oh look he took it down how interesting now does this mean Jimmy may have also breached the contract I'm gonna give it to you straight YouTube there's a decent chance contracts often have non-disparagement Clauses in which you agree you won't say anything negative about the other party and my guess is this one also had one so saying something disparaging about someone that you're in a contract with even if it it's true would be a breach but if the influence of Jimmy's tweets cause Financial losses for VDC then they may have a case although Jimmy did take the Tweet sound so how much of a loss was really caused by them Mike's Snapchat stock once dropped 1.3 billion dollars after a Kylie Jenner tweet so she had like 25 million followers when that happened yeah Mr Beast has 22 minutes shut the up what do you guys think about all this is VDC exploiting Mr Beast after giving him a bad deal or is Mr Beast using his influence and this lawsuit to get out of a deal he just doesn't like let me know in the comments down below and hey closer Jimmy if you need a lawyer I got you do you think he'll call me this time I don't know try bringing him a penny