I've missed the news that the ruling on whether Craig Wright is Satoshi was already made, so I thank op for bringing that to attention. Of course, I never believed that Wright was Satoshi, but the burden of proof was on COPA's side this time, so I was a bit worried about them.
I agree with the op that Satoshi deserves anonymity, and it's great that Craig won't be able to hinder Bitcoin development in the future by claiming that it's his creation, and he's the one who gets a get where it should be going.
I believe that even if Craig Wright is declared to be Satoshi, the Bitcoin community will not believe it is true until he has sufficient evidence related to the Bitcoin WhitePaper or ownership of the Genesis address. In other words, Craig Wright does not have enough credibility to make the community believe his claims. If he is capable enough, he should contribute to the development of Bitcoin instead of engaging in lawsuits that have no benefit to BTC. BSV is a joke of this market, I am surprised that it still exists and people are still trading BSV.
Anyway, we are still using Bitcoin every day, we are contributing to maintaining the liquidity and value of BTC in the financial revolution that Satoshi started, which is more important than all the lawsuits related to Satoshi's identity.