A Florida federal jury handed Megan Thee Stallion a decisive win Monday, awarding the Grammy-winning rapper $75,000 after determining that online personality Milagro “Mobz World” Cooper defamed her and amplified a deepfake porn video that ricocheted across the internet, tarnishing her reputation with accusations she lied under oath.

Jury Deliberates Two Days Before Reaching Verdict

The verdict arrived after roughly two days of deliberation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, concluding an eight-day trial that peeled back the layers of online harassment and digital manipulation. Jurors found Cooper liable for defamation per se, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and promotion of an altered sexual depiction, marking a stern rebuke of the influencer’s conduct.

Accusations Tied to Tory Lanez Case

Megan Thee Stallion — legally Megan Pete — filed the lawsuit in October 2024, accusing Cooper of acting as a paid disinformation amplifier for Canadian rapper Tory Lanez, whose real name is Daystar Peterson. Pete alleged that Cooper functioned as an “online rumor mill,” spreading false narratives following Lanez’s 2020 indictment for shooting her in the foot.

Lanez was convicted in 2022 by a Los Angeles jury of felony assault with a deadly weapon and is currently serving a 10-year prison sentence. According to Pete’s complaint, Cooper’s attacks escalated after the conviction, culminating in the spread of a doctored pornographic video portraying Pete — a video the jury agreed was both fabricated and harmful.

Legal Teams Behind the Battle

Pete’s legal team included John O’Sullivan, Daniel L. Humphrey, Mari F. Henderson, Marie Hayrapetian, Bomie Lee, Julian T. Schoen and Joanna E. Menillo of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP.

Cooper was represented by Jeremy McLymont of AsiliA Law Firm PA, Laisa Ene Pertet of Lerner Arnold & Winston LLP, Nathacha Bien-Aime of the Bien-Aime Law Firm and Ronda Dixon of Dixon Justice Center APC.

As deepfake technology becomes more accessible and online commentary grows more caustic, the ruling signals a watershed moment — a warning shot that digital distortions and rumor-driven defamation can carry real-world legal consequences.