News: 1721201585

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Craig Wright admits he isn't the inventor of Bitcoin after High Court judgment in UK

(2024/07/17)


Australian Craig Wright has finally admitted he is not the inventor of Bitcoin after losing several cases in the High Court of England and Wales, whose judge has suggested he be investigated for perjury.

Wright has for years claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto – the pseudonym used by whoever wrote the whitepaper that defined Bitcoin and created the reference architecture for the cryptocurrency.

And he didn't just claim to be Bitcoin's secret mastermind, he demanded the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) – founded to fight for open access to crypto intellectual property – remove the Bitcoin whitepaper from its website as he held its copyright. COPA demurred, and the matter went to court in the UK, where the lobby group [1]sought to prevent Wright from claiming to be the true brains behind Bitcoin. In truth, no one knows for sure the identity of Nakamoto, or at least isn't saying so.

[2]

COPA – backed by Jack Dorsey, Twitter founder and boss of crypto outfit Block – has a [3]roster of members that includes Coinbase and Block itself, who also commenced litigation.

[4]

[5]

The cases were bundled into a single High Court matter known as [6]COPA v Wright Identity Issue Trial whose judgment saw Mr Justice James Mellor find that Wright "lied to the court repeatedly and extensively" and that his proof of being Satoshi Nakamoto was "forged … on a grand scale." This was a reconfirmation of Mellor's previous rulings in March and May that Wright was not the inventor of Bitcoin.

Please prosecute this guy, top judge says

In a [7]judgment [PDF] delivered on Tuesday, Mr Justice Mellor noted Wright is yet to file an appeal.

The Aussie has satisfied at least one requirement of the judgment: Posting a message on his [8]personal website restating the court's findings that he is neither Satoshi Nakamoto nor the inventor of Bitcoin. (Two wrongs do make a Wright, eh?)

[9]Craig Wright's crypto wallet claim against Bitcoin SV devs back before judges

[10]I own that $4.5bn of digi-dosh so rewrite your blockchain and give it to me, Craig Wright tells Bitcoin SV devs

[11]Bitcoin 'inventor' will face forgery claims over his Satoshi Nakamoto proof, rules High Court

[12]Scammers double-scam victims by offering to help recover from scams

Mr Justice Mellor also ordered Wright to publish the same content on his X account and in Slack channels he frequents, so that it can receive wider attention. The judge did, however, deny a COPA demand that Wright place an ad in venerable UK newspaper The Times about his defeat in court. The group requested that penalty because the busted bit-bloke had used the organ for an ad of his own – in which he asked for a settlement that would have required COPA to accept his claim to be Nakamoto.

Wright will also have to pay more than £6 million of COPA's costs – something that might be hard to enforce as the ruling notes that the not-Bitcoin creator makes about £160k a year.

But perhaps the worst part of the ruling for Wright is that Mr Justice Mellor has recommended the UK's Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) act against Wright for forging documents and perjury – offenses that could see him fined, or even jailed, if convicted. ®

Get our [13]Tech Resources



[1] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/06/craig_wright_satoshi_nakamoto_forgery_claims/

[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZpeWOlEhEippJ-3NH2yc7AAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0

[3] https://www.opencrypto.org/members/

[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZpeWOlEhEippJ-3NH2yc7AAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/legal&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZpeWOlEhEippJ-3NH2yc7AAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/copa-v-wright/

[7] https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/COPA-v-Wright-Judgment.pdf

[8] https://craigwright.net/

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/15/craig_wright_vs_bitcoin_sv/

[10] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/19/craig_wright_bitcoin_sv_high_court_sueball/

[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/06/craig_wright_satoshi_nakamoto_forgery_claims/

[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/09/australia_rescam_warning/

[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/



He Can Afford It

Roj Blake

He should be able to pay the £6M without any problems - he can use some the money he made from inventing Bitcoin.

Oh.

Re: He Can Afford It

Sorry that handle is already taken.

He also still owes the Australian Taxation Office for AU$3m worth of fraudulently claimed tax credits for a supercomputer that never existed.

Re: He Can Afford It

t245t

[1]Another History of Craig Wright Fraud And Deception: The Bitcoin Supercomputer Saga

“Unraveling the umpteenth Potemkin Village of our favorite Satoshi Nakamoto cosplayer”

[1] https://medium.com/coinmonks/another-history-of-craig-wright-fraud-and-deception-the-bitcoin-supercomputer-saga-d719e8805c10

Anonymous Coward

I'm Satoshi!

Doctor Syntax

Undeniably - afterall Satoshi is anonymous.

Anonymous Coward

No, I'm Satoshi!

Neil Barnes

And so is my wife!

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

vogon00

pay more than £6 million of COPA's costs – something that might be hard to enforce as the ruling notes that the not-Bitcoin creator makes about £160k .

That's the risk he took. 'Winning' or 'Loosing' the case doesn't matter as you will have to pay a proportion (0% - 100%) of your and/or your opponents legal costs - especially as the 'game' is a complex as this one.

Item 199 on page 53 of [1]this says the decision regarding "... whether a prosecution should be commenced against Dr Wright for his wholescale perjury and forgery of documents ..." is being left to the British CPS. I for one hope that they do decide to prosecute for the possible offenses (See items 40 and 201), as someone has obviously been taking the piss!

Looking at Dr. Wright's Wikipedia entry, it says his PhD of 2017 was on "The quantification of information systems risk"... which is ironic as he seems to have spectacularly failed to assess the risks/rewards of disseminating the (dis?) information that he has, and of playing the high-stakes game in the first place. Looking at his business pedigree (See Wiki), it looks to me as if he has - as so many people or organizations do - believed his own hyperbole!

Sadly, I'm diabetic these days so I can't even enjoy the popcorn:-)

[1] https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/COPA-v-Wright-Judgment.pdf

Ozzie

Fred Dibnah

Ozzie is the ‘Ultimate Odor (sic) Remover’ according to their website. Australians are Aussies.

Nietzsche is pietzsche, but Schiller is killer, and Goethe is moethe.