Regulation

Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Fake Evidence, Judge Rules

Published

on

“We have seen a trickle-down effect from the ruling on a number of other disputes globally,” Grewal says. “For people outside of crypto, [all this] it might seem cartoonish. But with Wright’s claims fallen by the wayside, the community can breathe a sigh of relief. We think it’s a real victory.”

The ruling also had implications for Bitcoin Satoshi Vision, or BSV, a separate cryptocurrency network created by Wright in 2018. The idea for BSV is to adhere “as closely as possible to Satoshi’s original design,” as the site puts it web. describes it. In the days following the judge ruling that Wright is not Satoshi, the price of the BSV token decreased by 40%..

“We will always appreciate the contributions made by Dr. Craig Wright as a leading expert in blockchain technology,” says Cyrille A. Albrecht, CEO of the BSV Association. “However, our goal is, and always has been, to promote and support the enterprise-level evolution of the BSV blockchain.”

By declaring that Wright is not Satoshi, the ruling will bar him from bringing further lawsuits in the UK. It was created, Mellor writes, to ensure that Wright “had no possible basis on which to make threats [developers] with copyright or database rights arising from work performed by Satoshi Nakamoto. The judge will also decide at a later hearing whether to impose any specific injunctions on Wright.

However, the geographic scope of the ruling is limited, leaving Wright with the option to continue pursuing his intellectual property rights claim to Bitcoin in other legal jurisdictions.

General principles of copyright are “harmonised” under an agreement adopted by the vast majority of countries, says James Marsden, senior partner at law firm Dentons, meaning the COPA ruling is likely to be persuasive to other courts called upon to respond to Wright’s request. hold intellectual property rights to Bitcoin. However, “copyright is territorial,” he says. “The courts in each country will analyze a copyright case on their own basis.”

In his testimony at trial, Wright also hinted that he might have brandished his own treasure trove of patents related to blockchain technology to file further claims against Bitcoin developers. A ruling that Wright is not the creator of Bitcoin would not prevent him from doing so. “It is very difficult for any court to craft a ruling that prevents a committed party from repeating bogus claims,” Grewal says.

Granath, the defendant in Wright’s Norwegian defamation suit, imagines that Wright’s pursuit of his claim to be Satoshi will depend on the availability of funding.

The source of Wright’s funding was called into question during the trial. COPA alleges that online gambling mogul Calvin Ayre financed Wright’s various litigations. At trial, Wright denied that Ayre had financed his lawsuits. Ayre did not respond to a request for comment.

In March, Mellor posted an average of freezing order on $7.6 million of Wright’s estate to prevent him from taking steps to “evade the cost consequences of his loss at trial.” COPA has “a very strong claim to a very substantial sum in costs,” the judge wrote.

“I think this comes down to funding now, not Wright’s desire to continue claiming to be Satoshi,” Granath says. “I think the UK ruling renders any further legal action based on Wright’s claims pointless, meaning there is no longer the will and rationality to fund it.”

For its part, COPA hopes that the thoroughness of the judge’s findings against Wright – and the resulting damage to his credibility – will discourage him from pursuing further legal action, even if the option remains available to him.

“This was an extraordinary proceeding. He couldn’t have sent a clearer message to Dr. Wright and anyone else paying attention,” Grewal says. “I’m not too worried about Dr. Craig Wright.”

Update 5/21/24 5:00 PM EST: This story has been updated to include comment from BSV.

Source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Información básica sobre protección de datos Ver más

  • Responsable: Miguel Mamador.
  • Finalidad:  Moderar los comentarios.
  • Legitimación:  Por consentimiento del interesado.
  • Destinatarios y encargados de tratamiento:  No se ceden o comunican datos a terceros para prestar este servicio. El Titular ha contratado los servicios de alojamiento web a Banahosting que actúa como encargado de tratamiento.
  • Derechos: Acceder, rectificar y suprimir los datos.
  • Información Adicional: Puede consultar la información detallada en la Política de Privacidad.

Trending

Exit mobile version