NFT Lawsuits 2026 has become one of the most talked-about topics in Web3, as the legal fallout from the last market cycle finally catches up. Following the explosive NFT surge in 2021, the market saw a steep decline between 2022 and 2025, wiping out billions in value and revealing poor disclosure practices, overhyped celebrity endorsements, and shaky project foundations.
As NFTs attempt a cautious comeback in 2026, the environment is far more tightly regulated. Investors are no longer just accepting losses—they’re taking legal action. Courts are now examining cases involving celebrity-backed NFTs, claims that some were sold as unregistered securities, and abrupt project shutdowns that left buyers with worthless assets.
This article highlights four of the most important lawsuits happening right now, explains why legal action is on the rise, and explores what all of this means for collectors, creators, companies, and platforms working in a more closely watched Web3 space.
Why NFT Lawsuits Are Rising in 2026
The wave of NFT-related lawsuits in 2026 reflects delayed accountability from the last bull run.
The 2021 boom encouraged speed over substance. The crash that followed revealed structural flaws. Now in 2026, investors, regulators, and judges are actively working to determine who should be held responsible.
Three main drivers are behind this trend:
-
Undisclosed promotions, where celebrities and influencers allegedly failed to reveal equity stakes or payments
-
Securities law claims, arguing that some NFTs were marketed mainly as investment opportunities
-
Project shutdowns, where NFT initiatives were abandoned shortly after major sales
Unlike earlier years, legal action is having real consequences. Regulators are applying existing rules around advertising and disclosure, and courts are focusing on how NFTs were sold—not just what they claimed to be.
Top 4 NFT Lawsuits in 2026 (So Far)
Investors vs. Steve Aoki & Matthew Kalish (MetaZoo NFTs)
Background
MetaZoo Games LLC started in 2020 as a folklore-inspired trading card business and later expanded into NFTs during the 2021–2022 boom. Celebrity promotion helped fuel interest. The company filed for bankruptcy in 2024 and isn’t part of the current lawsuit.
Case framing
This class-action lawsuit was filed by investors against Steve Aoki and Matthew Kalish. The plaintiffs claim the two promoted MetaZoo Coin NFTs without being transparent about their financial interests or compensation.
Key allegations:
-
Hidden paid endorsements and equity stakes
-
Violations of FTC rules and Florida consumer protection laws
-
Price manipulation through celebrity-driven hype
MetaZoo Coin NFTs once traded for nearly 20 ETH per set. Plaintiffs say the project’s collapse led to tens of millions in losses. The case was filed in January 2026 and is still in its early stages.
Why it matters
This lawsuit directly addresses whether influencers can be held accountable for promoting digital assets—even when the underlying project is no longer active. Its outcome could influence future rules around celebrity involvement in Web3.
Theta Labs & Katy Perry NFT Fraud Suits
Background
Theta Labs teamed up with Katy Perry in 2021 to release NFTs linked to her Las Vegas residency. The announcement coincided with a sharp rise in THETA’s token price, making it one of the highest-profile celebrity NFT ventures of that time.
Allegations
In December 2025, two former employees filed whistleblower lawsuits alleging fraud and market manipulation by Theta’s leadership. Their claims include fake bidding on Perry NFTs, misleading announcements about business partnerships, insider trading, and retaliation against internal critics.
Claims focus on:
-
Artificially inflated prices
-
Coordinated token pumping
-
Misleading public communications
Katy Perry isn’t accused of any wrongdoing, but her involvement drew significant investor attention. THETA’s value has since dropped by about 95%, and the legal proceedings continue in California state court.
Why it matters
This case brings attention to how celebrity involvement can amplify investor risk and how internal whistleblowers are playing a growing role in exposing misconduct in Web3 companies.
Nike / RTFKT Class Action
Background
Nike acquired RTFKT in December 2021 and launched several high-profile digital sneaker drops and NFT collections. At its peak, the platform generated over $1 billion in secondary market trades.
RTFKT shut down its Web3 services in December 2024. A year later, Nike quietly sold the company to an unnamed buyer. News of the sale became public in early January 2026.
Allegations
The lawsuit was filed in 2025, and Plaintiffs argue that Nike promoted RTFKT NFTs as investment-like products and then walked away from the ecosystem after making significant profits.
Key claims:
-
NFTs functioned as unregistered securities
-
Misleading advertising practices
-
Financial losses tied to platform shutdown and corporate exit
The sale of RTFKT could play a major role in the case, especially regarding whether companies can fully walk away from responsibility after selling an NFT-based business.
Why it matters
This lawsuit could shape how courts view corporate accountability when large brands exit the NFT space. A ruling against Nike might discourage other companies from abruptly pulling out after generating revenue from digital asset sales.
DraftKings NFT Marketplace Settlement
Background
DraftKings launched its NFT Marketplace in August 2021, selling digital collectibles tied to sports moments. Though this lawsuit was settled in early 2025, it’s included here because the outcome has shaped how companies now handle legal risks tied to NFTs.
Claims and outcome
A 2023 class-action lawsuit claimed DraftKings sold NFTs that should have been registered as securities and operated a marketplace without proper licenses. In early 2025, the company settled for $10 million without admitting any wrongdoing and shut down the platform permanently.
Settlement highlights:
-
$10 million settlement fund approved by the court
-
Around 175,000 users were initially included in the class
-
Final claim amounts were determined in July 2025
While participation ended up being lower than expected, the settlement is still one of the largest NFT-related payouts so far.
Why it matters
This case set a financial precedent for how companies might handle NFT-related legal risks in the future. It also highlighted that large platforms may prefer to settle rather than risk a court decision that could label NFTs as securities.
What This Means for NFT Holders & Creators
The increase in NFT lawsuits in 2026 signals a new era of accountability for Web3.
Key takeaways:
-
Transparency is a requirement, not a suggestion
-
Real-world utility and long-term support now matter more than flashy launches
-
Big-name brands don’t get a free pass if things fall apart
Legal concerns have become part of how people assess the value and risk of NFT projects. Going forward, both creators and buyers will need to think more carefully about what protections and promises are in place before getting involved.
Final Thoughts
The legal cases shaping 2026 show that Web3 is moving past its early, more chaotic days. Courts are beginning to draw clearer lines between digital collectibles and investment products, and between marketing hype and misleading behavior.
While these lawsuits may slow down some speculative trends, they’re also helping build a more solid foundation for the next generation of NFT projects. In the future, projects that prioritize clear communication, fairness, and responsibility are the ones most likely to last.
