Craig Steven Wright is a liar and a fraud - Tulip Trust addresses signed message

[Wind_FURY]

Plus Craig Wright knows that he will never have control over the private keys of the coins he claimed was owned by him. Why, and what is the true motive? Who is behind it?

[1713977882]

1713977882

[1713977882]

1713977882

[1713977882]

1713977882

[nutildah]

Edit: After posting this, I realized Wind_FURY may just be asking a rhetorical question, but oh well, I already typed all this out, so please bear with me.

Plus Craig Wright knows that he will never have control over the private keys of the coins he claimed was owned by him. Why, and what is the true motive? Who is behind it?

He was behind it first, and now Calvin is behind him along for the ride.

The whole ATO saga makes it apparent that he's always been a con artist, albeit admittedly a bit more clever of one than most.

Calvin understands the marketing power of a great backstory. Back in his Bodog days, he used to publish stories under the pseudonym Cole Turner, who was the adventuring, Indiana Jones-type "CEO" of the company.

https://www.fastcompany.com/898669/personality-behind-online-gaming-site-bodog

Collaborating with his friend Christopher Costigan of Gambling911.com, a popular industry news site, he created a public alter ego, Cole Turner the CEO, and faked elaborate adventures that Bodog users could follow online. There was a 2003 party excursion to Cambodia pitched to the Web audience as an expedition gone awry, involving hookers, terrorists, opium smugglers, and, ultimately, Turner’s kidnapping. Ayre dressed hotel employees as gun-toting rebels and posted the photos. At least one concerned customer phoned to plead for the release of Bodog’s beloved faux CEO.

“I said, ‘Man, it’s kind of embarrassing, but I’ll do it,’ ” Costigan recalls. “I remember people asking if it’s really happening. I’m like, ‘Are you kidding me? You actually believe this stuff?’ ”

In 2004, Ayre outed Turner, then picked up the old boy’s fedora himself, flaunting a playboy lifestyle under his own name and modeling himself after his two idols, Hugh Hefner and Richard Branson — hiding nothing while exaggerating everything. “There is no personal in my life,” he told me.

We needn't look any further to understand what the "true motive" is: money... Well, maybe not just "money" but rather obscene wealth, undue recognition and being able to enjoy the other benefits of being a cult figure.

It might be understandable to think there is some deeper motive at play here, given how bad Craig has bungled his Faketoshi exploits, but he couldn't trick the ATO into believing he was a legitimate businessman and I believe its more likely he is just a victim of his own incompetence, both then and now.

And regardless of whatever ignorant nonsense franky is conjecturing, the court doesn't have to rule that Craig is Satoshi or the Tulip Trust exists in order for Ira Kleiman to be entitled to half of whatever it is the court finds was developed during their partnership. We all know its likely nothing, and half of nothing is still nothing, but we'll need to wait for the court to catch on to this.

Even a settlement doesn't mean anything about Craig being Satoshi was ruled by the court. It's a misunderstanding of the legal process to assume that it does. Not only did the judge say he doesn't believe the Tulip Trust exists, he said he would make no ruling on whether or not Craig is Satoshi upon issuing the default judgment against Craig. There's no reason to believe this would change a second time around.

[franky1]

And regardless of whatever ignorant nonsense franky is conjecturing, the court doesn't have to rule that Craig is Satoshi or the Tulip Trust exists in order for Ira Kleiman to be entitled to half of whatever it is the court finds was developed during their partnership. We all know its likely nothing, and half of nothing is still nothing, but we'll need to wait for the court to catch on to this.

yep i called it. certain idiots actually think CSW&dave actually developed and actually mined in 2009-2010
(facepalm)

now thats what i call ignorant conjecture

yet reality is clear the CSW game of the last 4 years is very publicly known and been played many times. no conjecture. its clear.
i seriously cant believe people actually think CSW&dave actually had some involvement of developing bitcoin.
no wonder he cant understand whats actually been said

[Wind_FURY]

And regardless of whatever ignorant nonsense franky is conjecturing, the court doesn't have to rule that Craig is Satoshi or the Tulip Trust exists in order for Ira Kleiman to be entitled to half of whatever it is the court finds was developed during their partnership. We all know its likely nothing, and half of nothing is still nothing, but we'll need to wait for the court to catch on to this.

yep i called it. certain idiots actually think CSW&dave actually developed and actually mined in 2009-2010
(facepalm)

now thats what i call ignorant conjecture

yet reality is clear the CSW game of the last 4 years is very publicly known and been played many times. no conjecture. its clear.

i seriously cant believe people actually think CSW&dave actually had some involvement of developing bitcoin.
no wonder he cant understand whats actually been said

No, it's still a only theory, but I do agree. What's the true purpose of this Borat-like character? Who's behind him? Why did Gavin Andresen vouch for him? Who's behind him as well?

Edit: After posting this, I realized Wind_FURY may just be asking a rhetorical question, but oh well, I already typed all this out, so please bear with me.

Plus Craig Wright knows that he will never have control over the private keys of the coins he claimed was owned by him. Why, and what is the true motive? Who is behind it?

He was behind it first, and now Calvin is behind him along for the ride.

Who's behind Calvin Ayre?

[nutildah]

no wonder he cant understand whats actually been said

The irony is too much to bear.

No, it's still a only theory, but I do agree. What's the true purpose of this Borat-like character? Who's behind him? Why did Gavin Andresen vouch for him? Who's behind him as well?

Edit: After posting this, I realized Wind_FURY may just be asking a rhetorical question, but oh well, I already typed all this out, so please bear with me.

Plus Craig Wright knows that he will never have control over the private keys of the coins he claimed was owned by him. Why, and what is the true motive? Who is behind it?

He was behind it first, and now Calvin is behind him along for the ride.

Who's behind Calvin Ayre?

Why does someone have to be behind everybody?

Who's behind the Illuminati? Who's behind the Lizard People?

[franky1]

Who's behind Calvin Ayre?

reading the ACTUAL DOCUMENTS
there are a couple 'investment guys' names that pop up

what nutildah also does not realise is
1. CSW never invented bitcoin(but nutty thinks he might have(facepalm))
2. that CSW faked making it(but nutty is unsure(facepalm))
3. he scammed the ATO, he scammed calvin, he scammed 'the investment guys'
4. they all know he scammed them. but they are told if they play along they will get rich from the patent trolling and media story revenues in the future

heck even IRA knows he wont see an of the 410k because there is n actual 820k accessible by CSW. never was
IRA can only really feel like making any large income from joining CSW patent troll scam

but hey nutty thinks IRA was related to the real satoshi and ira will be getting paid from a supposed stash of 820k coin(facepalm)

very silly nutty has become.
the games have been clear for 4 years. but nutty is stuck with the maybe's and if's of speculation.

[AGD]

Who's behind Calvin Ayre?

reading the ACTUAL DOCUMENTS
there are a couple 'investment guys' names that pop up

what nutildah also does not realise is
1. CSW never invented bitcoin(but nutty thinks he might have(facepalm))
2. that CSW faked making it(but nutty is unsure(facepalm))
3. he scammed the ATO, he scammed calvin, he scammed 'the investment guys'
4. they all know he scammed them. but they are told if they play along they will get rich from the patent trolling and media story revenues in the future

heck even IRA knows he wont see an of the 410k because there is n actual 820k accessible by CSW. never was
IRA can only really feel like making any large income from joining CSW patent troll scam

but hey nutty thinks IRA was related to the real satoshi and ira will be getting paid from a supposed stash of 820k coin(facepalm)

very silly nutty has become.
the games have been clear for 4 years. but nutty is stuck with the maybe's and if's of speculation.

C'mon Franky, noone here believes, that CSW is the inventor of Bitcoin and also noone here believes that CSW has 820k Bitcoin. Are you really that stupid?

[gmaxwell]

And regardless of whatever ignorant nonsense franky is conjecturing, the court doesn't have to rule that Craig is Satoshi or the Tulip Trust exists in order for Ira Kleiman to be entitled to half of whatever it is the court finds was developed during their partnership. We all know its likely nothing, and half of nothing is still nothing, but we'll need to wait for the court to catch on to this.

The amusing thing here is that the plaintiff (and the court!) are allowed to take the defendant's word for it when they want to.

If I go announcing from the rooftops that you and I had a partnership that earned 20 billion dollars which I have in my possession, even though it's all a total lie you can go to court and sue me for your half of the 20 billion and likely win.

Unless I recant my claims I'm going to be screwed: Because there never was a partnership I won't be able to prove that its terms didn't entitle you to an equal share, nor will I be able to demonstrate that I paid you out-- or any of the other facts that would otherwise move things from the default assumption that half of the proceeds from our partnership were yours.  In fact, if I try to prove those things, I'll just make myself look more and more dishonest as you continue to show those proofs were forgeries. -- and that is exactly what has happened in Wright's case.

So even though that 20bn doesn't exist it would be utterly unsurprising that the court would go ahead and award you 10bn plus damages.   Now, you can't collect that 10bn  (because it doesn't exist) but you can go ahead and collect from me whatever I do have-- by getting court orders to seizes assets or garnish wages.

The courts are an adversarial system. The court itself isn't trying to get at the truth, it's just arbitrating legal combat between the parties.  In the US (and generally, common law) tradition you're totally free to screw yourself over, if you so choose.  If someone wants to tell a dumb lie and stick to it, the court is happy to let them suffer the consequences.

Wright could have avoided all this by simply responding to the lawsuit by admitting that he was committing fraud on the ATO and his investors, that he and Dave's "partnership" was limited to some failed government bids, and that they didn't mine any Bitcoin much less create the Bitcoin system.  ... but if he did that he'd expose himself to criminal prosecution, destroy any potential for future income, and potentially even get himself assassinated by one of his shady victims.  With that trade-off its not hard to see why he'd choose to roll the dice and risk a likely civil judgement of tens of billions.

C'mon Franky, noone here believes, that CSW is the inventor of Bitcoin and also noone here believes that CSW has 820k Bitcoin. Are you really that stupid?

Indeed. The problem is that franky himself is just barely quick enough to avoid falling for it, so he can't comprehend that the people he's arguing with-- whom he has zero respect for-- had a much easier time seeing through that fraud.

[franky1]

im not the one thats confused on the issue

gmax for once is 90% right with the last post.
however this case is nt about giving IRA 410k coins.
its about declaring the IP of bitcoin as belonging to both IRA and CSW

while you lot cry about the coins. your missing the point about the IP

anyway another example of how some people are not 100% knowing that the trust was all a lie is when certain people say things like nutildah:
the court doesn't have to rule that Craig is Satoshi or the Tulip Trust exists in order for Ira Kleiman to be entitled to half of whatever it is the court finds was developed during their partnership. We all know its likely nothing, and half of nothing is still nothing, but we'll need to wait for the court to catch on to this.

..
'half of whatever the court finds was developed during their partnership
'likely nothing'
nutty still unsure??

again nutty is thinking the coins will catch him out.. but only after legitimising the IP claim
not realising the legitimising of the partnership. is the game win for CSW, .. oh and for IRA

see its nutty thats confused and things there was a partnership and thinks theres something to find
nutty is the one with the if's and maybe's

it was me that in this topic was pointing out that its not to do with the coins. because the reality is there are none
ira knows this too.
the point is if the 'partnership' is validated. then that validation is then legalised in a dcument that can then be used at a patent office as 'proof' to say CSW was involved. and then the patent trlling begins
again CSW game for last 4 years.

i said my stance so many times. and it has not changed.
but a certain few others love their 'if's and maybes. and hopes IRA gets 410k coins.
a certain few others love their if's and maybes that the court will find something abut the partnership developments.
(facepalm)

[gmaxwell]

but a certain few others love their 'if's and maybes. and hopes IRA gets 410k coins.

That isn't what anyone is saying.

Courts do not award specific performance, they award cash damages. (Though parties can agree to accept specific performance in lieu of cash damages).

When wright loses his case because he himself claimed a partnership existed and then submitted mountains of provably forged documents, the court will order him to pay damaged based on the courts findings (which are ultimately based on wright's own claims).  It doesn't matter than the Bitcoin wright claims to own doesn't exist.

In the likely case Wright loses the plaintiff get awarded a judgement on the order of 15-25 billion dollars (highest value of the stolen assets times three, which is a usual penalty for theft accompanied by fraud).  Wright won't be able to pay it, obviously, but with that judgement in hand the plaintiff will be able to go and attempt seize whatever assets wright does own as well as garnish his income.  Presumably the plaintiff did the math and believes that they'll be able to extract enough to pay for their legal costs.  Just a couple million dollars would be enough to make it worthwhile, based on what nchain is paying wright (500k GBP/yr or something like that, per discovery) this doesn't sound like a totally insane plan.

I think it is unlikely that the plaintiff will lose at this point:  When you destroy or fake evidence in a civil trial that evidence is presumed to be prejudicial to your interest (otherwise, why would you have faked it)-- and Wright has dug himself in really deep now with forgeries and evasion.

[franky1]

lets word it in some other more certain group scenario

imagine Doomad wanted to claim that he and nutty and pietre wuiile had a secret partnership to develop segwit code.
and wanted default judgement of all IP related to segwit code and all assets held on segwit keys.

a few people will think its about the coins..
but other rational minded folk will see its about patent trolling anyone that has ever used segwit.


to play the foolish 'damages' claim of coins. first needs to establish the partnership and IP rights.
the partnership/IP rights claim is all they actually seek

so you can play all you like about later cases of maybe fights for damages. but as soon as you see the accreditation that the partnership is valid and the IP rights are in play. then you will see the patent trolling

[gmaxwell]

imagine Doomad wanted to claim that he and nutty and pietre wuiile had a secret partnership to develop segwit code. and wanted default judgement of all IP related to segwit code and all assets held on segwit keys.

What it seems like you're missing is that Wright himself claimed many many times that he and Dave partnered to create bitcoin.  He did this because he knows he is obviously technically incompetent and knew that few people would ever be convinced he created bitcoin on his own. By virtually defiling the corpse of his dead acquaintance he hoped to add a little credibility to his scam.

So a parallel case would be if Doomad claimed he and Pieter created segwit and that Doomad (claimed he) collected a billion dollar payment for this work, and then Pieter turned around and sued doomad for his share of the claimed (and non-existing) billion. If doomad didn't admit he was lying about the partnership and the money, he might well lose such a case.  But the only consequence is that he'd be ordered to pay Pieter.  It wouldn't let him go on and cause trouble for anyone else.

but other rational minded folk will see its about patent trolling anyone that has ever used segwit.

Except no such patent rights can exist. Lets imagine (lol) that Wright actually did create Bitcoin.  When he published it to the world his own publication created prior-art which is an absolute bar against patentability.  Once a year passed after Bitcoin's release no person in the world, not even Satoshi, could make a valid patent filing about it.  If someone tried to litigate over something like that it would be so outrageously false that their attornies might face misconduct charges over it.

If the patent system worked like little kids playing "dibbs" then I'd see where your argument came from.  But it doesn't.  You can't go file valid patents on long ago published things, even if you were the inventor of those things.  (and getting sued by someone who might well be a compatriot would never be taken as evidence that you were the inventor of something in someone elses case, regardless)

[Source: My partner is a @$@ patent attorney]

It is really clear that Wright intends to attempt patent trolling-- or at least intends to convince his victim-investors that he intends to engage in patent trolling, for sure. But most of that appears to be based on a complete and total misunderstanding of the patent system.  He also seems to think that he can sue random people and somehow get Satoshi's bitcoin's turned over to him-- or again, intends to convince his victims of this--, but that isn't how the courts or Bitcoin works.  It might be the case that the plaintiff also labours under these or related stupidities, but it seems unlikely to me and it doesn't matter if they do because that just isn't how things work.

[franky1]

imagine Doomad wanted to claim that he and nutty and pietre wuiile had a secret partnership to develop segwit code. and wanted default judgement of all IP related to segwit code and all assets held on segwit keys.

What it seems like you're missing is that Wright himself claimed many many times that he and Dave partnered to create bitcoin.  He did this because he knows he is obviously technically incompetent and knew that few people would ever be convinced he created bitcoin on his own. By virtually defiling the corpse of his dead acquaintance he hoped to add a little credibility to his scam.

yet my post history actually shows for years i been saying that CSW is incompetent and has scammed and lied and has been defiling the dead corpse of someone he claimed was a friend..
yep even within days of the 'signature proof' in 2016 i been calling out on CSW sh!t


its nutildah and others that think there was actually a bitcoin partnership. (facepalm)
anyway

So a parallel case would be if Doomad claimed he and Pieter created segwit and that Doomad (claimed he) collected a billion dollar payment for this work, and then Pieter turned around and sued doomad for his share of the claimed (and non-existing) billion. If doomad didn't admit he was lying about the partnership and the money, he might well lose such a case.  But the only consequence is that he'd be ordered to pay Pieter.  It wouldn't let him go on and cause trouble for anyone else.

...
gmax says:
'and pieter turned around and sued doomad for his share of the claimed (and non-existing billions)

but we all know in this scenario(pandering to nutty delusion) that pieter relative is not simply asking for half a billion.
instead. pieter relative is saying. yes doomad and pieter did create segwit together and we want the court to judge and find the facts to be true that doomad was part of segwits creation. that it was a 50/50 partnership and all IP rights to segwit belong to pieter and doomad

that request does not have the words 'doomad needs to pay me half'
emphasis it does nt request 'gimme some dollar'

pieter relative actual request to the judge. would then actually give doomad some IP rights privilege.
pieter relative is not shouting from the rooftops that doomad had nothing to do with coding segwit

see the game now??


by use of pieter as a dave character. and segwit code as a bitcoin code IP.. i am not infering that dave did code bitcoin. instead a few nutty epeople think dave could have. so playing into their delusion i am simply trying to show whats actually happening by changing character names into faces of people they know well.
to maybe trigger their intelect to start functioining on the details of the request itself
igreyed this out as its not the important point of the TOPIC of the game play happening in court. so by greying it out i hope you have the ethical mind for once to not make it into a knit pick of how the characters involved. and instead concentrate on the GAME PLAY at work to get IP rights



a better example(not pandering to nuttys delusion).. more realistic to reality is if pieter was anonymous and disapeared in 2017 never coming back and it was a troll case of windfury and doomad claiming they wrote segwit.. they are 'pieter' and how windury is asking a judge to judge 'facts to be true' thats windfury and doomad created segwit and everything related to segwit belngs to windfury and doomad
again where the request is to legitimise the windfury/doomad partnership and all 'pieter' IP belong to them

as for the 'prior art' clause
prior art is now saying 'satoshi invented it. full stop (scenario pieter invented it)
but team windfury and doomad want to be proclaimed as being pieter by law. so they can then rampage the community. its not about changing author from 'pieter' to 'windfury/doomad'
its having a judges document that says they are 'pieter' so that they can fight any case under 'pieter' in the future, and gain favour of them cases because 'they are pieter and prior art is owned by pieter

again for the many posts attempt
team windfury is not requesting that he deserves damages in the realm of 50% of all coins on segwit addresses. team windfury is asking the judge to make then 50% partners of 'pieter' and all segwit IP belong to them

do you understand the game now that i have made the characters more understandable to your lil group of similar minded friends
we all know windfury and doomad dont have the skills and history, personailty to have actually coded segwit themselves. we all know they dont deserve or have IP. but the game is not about the coins. its about being proclaimed as the inventors and IP owners of the code/invention

[gmaxwell]

yet my post history actually shows for years i been saying that CSW is incompetent and has scammed and lied and has been defiling the dead corpse of someone he claimed was a friend..
yep even within days of the 'signature proof' in 2016 i been calling out on CSW sh!t

its nutildah and others that think there was actually a bitcoin partnership. (facepalm)
anyway

This is the same for almost every person here including nutildah. The only exceptions are CSW shills like hv_, and microguy-- I've tagged most with negative trust so you can see them on my ratings.

To the point that wright even paid someone to create an idiotic report to try to debunk stuff we've said.

So congrats for not being wrong about something for once.

So a parallel case would be if Doomad claimed he and Pieter created segwit and that Doomad (claimed he) collected a billion dollar payment for this work, and then Pieter turned around and sued doomad for his share of the claimed (and non-existing) billion. If doomad didn't admit he was lying about the partnership and the money, he might well lose such a case.  But the only consequence is that he'd be ordered to pay Pieter.  It wouldn't let him go on and cause trouble for anyone else.

but we all know in this scenario(pandering to nutty delusion) that pieter relative is not simply asking for half a billion.
instead. pieter relative is saying. yes doomad and pieter did create segwit together and we want the court to judge and find the facts to be true that doomad was part of segwits creation. that it was a 50/50 partnership and all IP rights to segwit belong to pieter and doomad

a better example(not pandering to nuttys delusion).. more realistic to reality is if pieter was anonymous and disapeared in 2017 never coming back and it was a troll case of windfury and doomad claiming they wrote segwit.. they are 'pieter' and how windury is asking a judge to judge 'facts to be true' thats windfury and doomad created segwit and everything related to segwit belngs to windfury and doomad
again where the request is to legitimise the windfury/doomad partnership and all 'pieter' IP belong to them

Again:  No patent right to Bitcoin (or segwit, for that matter) could exist now regardless of who created it because none were applied for by the deadline. Similarly, no copyright of interest can exists because Bitcoin was published under an MIT license. No other kind of IP would be applicable so no IP can exist.

You cannot publish something and then ten years later patent it.  In most of the world you must apply for the patent before making your work available to the public, in the US the inventor has a one year grace period after their own publication.

You're just confusing yourself by making up weird stories and swapping around people and whatnot.  Forget about all that shit.

If Satoshi were to turn super evil and return and everyone agreed it was actually Satoshi... what "IP rights" thing could he do in relation to Bitcoin?  Absolutely fucking nothing. He could suck an egg, but he wouldn't have any relevant rights over Bitcoin.  And so no matter how successful Fraudtoshi was as convincing people that he was Satoshi or the plaintiff in the case against him was... none of them would gain anything in terms of "IP rights" to Bitcoin because there is absolutely nothing to be gained.

A conman can't gain more rights than Satoshi has by pretending to be Satoshi.
 
Basically you are arguing that Satoshi owns the bitcoin system in some legal sense, this is a nonsense claim that has nothing to do with fraudtoshi. If it were true it would make bitcoin worthless and pointless, but -- fortunately-- there isn't an ounce of truth to it.

[rdbase]

^^
The problem is Csw thinks he created bitcoin but he has stated he suffers from autism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFMJ9yDCTjY
This guy calls him a straight out fool who simply doesnt know anything about bitcoin.

[JayJuanGee]

And regardless of whatever ignorant nonsense franky is conjecturing, the court doesn't have to rule that Craig is Satoshi or the Tulip Trust exists in order for Ira Kleiman to be entitled to half of whatever it is the court finds was developed during their partnership. We all know its likely nothing, and half of nothing is still nothing, but we'll need to wait for the court to catch on to this.

The amusing thing here is that the plaintiff (and the court!) are allowed to take the defendant's word for it when they want to.

Don't tell me that you are making franky1's leap of logic here?  (I see in your subsequent post(s) that you seem to be making this argument with a kind of hypothetical jest - rather than really believing such a statement, but I will respond anyhow.... see below)

The court is not taking defendant's word.  They are just narrowing down regarding what is contested, and if certain facts or issues are not contested, then the court does not need to resolve that portion or those issues, unless it is relevant to the case and the court sua sponte believes that it must resolve an issue that is not being raised or contested by the parties (not common that a court will raise sua sponte issues).

So, for example, if the court is acknowledging that neither party contests whether Craig is Satoshi and whether Craig had a partnership with dave kleinman, then those issues do not need to be resolved because both parties agree to that part.

The court then focuses on the factual parts that need to be resolve in order to make a ruling... However, maybe down the road, the court might determine that something that the parties have agreed to does need to be resolved, then the court will ask the parties to present evidence or to brief on those kinds of questions... otherwise, when the court rules, it may well accept as facts that craig is satoshi and that craig had a partnership with Dave, even though there is no fucking way that those matters could be proven, but for the purposes of the case, it is not centrally material.. even though indirectly the court has conceded those points of the case without ruling on them directly..

These kinds of things happen all the time in the law.. Courts rarely seek clarification of facts that are stipulated by the parties and that are therefore not relevant to the issues that are directly in front of the court to be decided.

If I go announcing from the rooftops that you and I had a partnership that earned 20 billion dollars which I have in my possession, even though it's all a total lie you can go to court and sue me for your half of the 20 billion and likely win.

Exactly... if you do not contest the partnership and if you do not contest the $20billion that you proclaimed to have in your possession, then you better damned well be ready to pay up your $10billion.   

Unless I recant my claims I'm going to be screwed:

That's right.  You are left in a dilemma, and you better decide otherwise you are quite likely to get a judgement for $10billion against you.. maybe even more because you are a pain in the ass, too.

Because there never was a partnership I won't be able to prove that its terms didn't entitle you to an equal share, nor will I be able to demonstrate that I paid you out-- or any of the other facts that would otherwise move things from the default assumption that half of the proceeds from our partnership were yours.  In fact, if I try to prove those things, I'll just make myself look more and more dishonest as you continue to show those proofs were forgeries. -- and that is exactly what has happened in Wright's case.

That's right.  CSW has painted his lil selfie into a corner.

So even though that 20bn doesn't exist it would be utterly unsurprising that the court would go ahead and award you 10bn plus damages.   Now, you can't collect that 10bn  (because it doesn't exist) but you can go ahead and collect from me whatever I do have-- by getting court orders to seizes assets or garnish wages.

That is be called: koreck.    You better gather all your lil items and put up a garage sale for all ur lil tinglies.

The courts are an adversarial system. The court itself isn't trying to get at the truth, it's just arbitrating legal combat between the parties.  In the US (and generally, common law) tradition you're totally free to screw yourself over, if you so choose.  If someone wants to tell a dumb lie and stick to it, the court is happy to let them suffer the consequences.

No argument here.

Wright could have avoided all this by simply responding to the lawsuit by admitting that he was committing fraud on the ATO and his investors, that he and Dave's "partnership" was limited to some failed government bids, and that they didn't mine any Bitcoin much less create the Bitcoin system.  ... but if he did that he'd expose himself to criminal prosecution, destroy any potential for future income, and potentially even get himself assassinated by one of his shady victims.  With that trade-off its not hard to see why he'd choose to roll the dice and risk a likely civil judgement of tens of billions.

There might have been other options, too... but sure, that was likely one of his other most viable of options.. that was not really a great option, either, as you acknowledge.

i said my stance so many times. and it has not changed.
but a certain few others love their 'if's and maybes. and hopes IRA gets 410k coins.
a certain few others love their if's and maybes that the court will find something abut the partnership developments.
(facepalm)

Yes.  You have stuck to your guns about things that have not happened yet.

You have also stuck to your guns about your stupid-ass lame theories that involve the intentions of the parties, including your assertion that Ira's intention is the same as CSW... which is ridiculous on the face and even more ridiculous when you attempt to defend such nonsense that is neither backed up by fact or logic to support your fantasylandia conclusion(s).

[various delusional attempts at making analogies]

Waste of time to explore these pie in the sky delusional attempts at analogies.

[nutildah]

what nutildah also does not realise is
1. CSW never invented bitcoin(but nutty thinks he might have(facepalm))
2. that CSW faked making it(but nutty is unsure(facepalm))
3. he scammed the ATO, he scammed calvin, he scammed 'the investment guys'
4. they all know he scammed them. but they are told if they play along they will get rich from the patent trolling and media story revenues in the future

heck even IRA knows he wont see an of the 410k because there is n actual 820k accessible by CSW. never was
IRA can only really feel like making any large income from joining CSW patent troll scam

but hey nutty thinks IRA was related to the real satoshi and ira will be getting paid from a supposed stash of 820k coin(facepalm)

very silly nutty has become.
the games have been clear for 4 years. but nutty is stuck with the maybe's and if's of speculation.

its nutildah and others that think there was actually a bitcoin partnership. (facepalm)
anyway

No no no no and a hundred times "no." I never came close to saying any of this or even implying it. Learn to read.

I only read this because it was quoted. Not taking you off ignore but I will counter your bullshit about me in other peoples' quotes when I see it.

[Wind_FURY]

no wonder he cant understand whats actually been said

The irony is too much to bear.

No, it's still a only theory, but I do agree. What's the true purpose of this Borat-like character? Who's behind him? Why did Gavin Andresen vouch for him? Who's behind him as well?

Edit: After posting this, I realized Wind_FURY may just be asking a rhetorical question, but oh well, I already typed all this out, so please bear with me.

Plus Craig Wright knows that he will never have control over the private keys of the coins he claimed was owned by him. Why, and what is the true motive? Who is behind it?

He was behind it first, and now Calvin is behind him along for the ride.

Who's behind Calvin Ayre?

Why does someone have to be behind everybody?

Because Craig Wright/Calvin Ayre firmly stays with their narrative, despite the evidence against them, and clearly they themselves know they aren't fooling anyone? YES there's someone, and with a hidden motive.

Who's behind the Illuminati? Who's behind the Lizard People?

I don't know. Why did Gavin Andresen vouch for Craig Wright? Why did Satoshi leave?

[nutildah]

Why does someone have to be behind everybody?

Because Craig Wright/Calvin Ayre firmly stays with their narrative, despite the evidence against them, and clearly they themselves know they aren't fooling anyone? YES there's someone, and with a hidden motive.

Who's behind the Illuminati? Who's behind the Lizard People?

I don't know. Why did Gavin Andresen vouch for Craig Wright? Why did Satoshi leave?

OK well technically you are right as Craig has financiers that backed him under the pretense that he is Satoshi -- I forgot about that. They were referred to in Gavin's testimony as "The Money Men." Andrew O'Hagan even referred to them in his Satoshi Affair book back in 2016.

https://www.shortlist.com/news/julian-assange-andrew-o-hagan-books-satoshi-bitcoin-interview

The money men behind Craig Wright had absolved him off of his dues, writing off nearly $15 million in debt that Wright’s companies had racked up. $1.5 million had gone to Wright’s lawyers alone. The reason for backing him? To them, he was Satoshi Nakamoto. The intellectual property belonging Satoshi Nakamoto, they believed, would fetch them upwards of a billion dollars.
...
Wright’s financial backers planned to move Wright to London (which they did) to “set up a research and development centre for him, with around thirty staff working under him,” O’Hagan wrote.

They would complete the work on his inventions and patent applications – he appeared to have hundreds of them – and the whole lot would be sold as the work of Satoshi Nakamoto, who would be unmasked as part of the project.

He added:

MacGregor [Wright’s Canadian backer] later told me he was speaking to Google and Uber, as well as to a number of Swiss banks. ‘The plan was to package it all up and sell it,’ Matthews told me. ‘The plan was never to operate it.’

Here's a good jumping off point for those inclined to do further research:

Australian Stefan Matthews, who began working for Ayre in 2011, was a director of EITC Holdings until at least late 2016. It isn’t clear if he’s still associated with the company. Canadian Robert MacGregor, another long-term Ayre associate, was a director of EITC Holdings until mid-April 2016. The documents do not disclose the shareholders of the company.

Matthews and MacGregor appear with Wright in a June 2015 photograph seen by Reuters. Neither man responded to requests for comment. Sources familiar with the company said they had gone to some lengths to avoid their roles in EITC being discovered.

Here's an interesting reveal: EITC Holdings became nChain.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-wright-fund-exclusive/exclusive-company-behind-bitcoin-creator-sold-to-private-investors-idUSKBN17F26V

Reuters previously identified nChain, formerly known as EITC Holdings, as Wright’s vehicle for filing hundreds of bitcoin and blockchain-related patents.

UK records confirm that the target company - under both its EITC and nChain names - already filed more than 80 bitcoin and blockchain-related patents.

A person close to the deal said $300 million had been invested in nChain, but it was not clear over what period of time.

So the money men who backed Craig already got what they wanted out of him and now the problem of Faketoshi has been passed down to the private investors of nChain.

As far as Gavin is concerned, he (most likely) just played an unwitting role in helping Craig sell the idea that he was Satoshi to the money men. Even though he remains a bit stubborn about the whole signing incident (at which the money men were present), he's more willing now than ever to admit that he was probably "bamboozled."

From Gavin's testimony (part 1, part 2) :

page 131

So the blog post that Craig released was not at all what I expected him to release. I expected him to release a very simple, you know, I am Satoshi, here is some -- here is a simple message signed with an early key from an early block.

Instead, he released a very wacky supposed proof that actually wasn't a proof of anything but was incredibly technical and hard to follow, and I was as surprised as anybody to see that. And it -- it took, I don't know, a few hours, a day, for somebody to -- to figure out what all that technical gobbledygook actually meant and to show that it wasn't actually a proof of anything.

Q So he didn't even almost prove he was Satoshi?

A Correct. Anybody could have produced that gobbledygook proof.

Q Why didn't he release a simple signed message?

A I don't know.

page 157

Q You said that he -- he led you to believe he wanted one thing from you, and really you thought he really wanted something else.

A I suspect -- yeah, I mean, I guess, you  know, I -- I thought that my piece would be part of a larger whole of him proving beyond a reasonable doubt to the world that he was Satoshi Nakamoto. And I thought that that's what he wanted from me. And then he did not complete the rest of the puzzle, and so that makes me wonder, is that really what he wanted from me, or did he have some other ulterior motive for flying me to London and -- and doing this -- the proof session? And I don't know what that other motive would be.

As far as Satoshi... who knows? All we have to go on is his word that he's moved on to other things.

[franky1]

gmax fails to understand the whole game of patent trolling
(ill link the tactic at bottom. spoilers its not about winning at trial its the pre-trial strategy)

firstly. imagine CSW was judged as part of team satoshi
he can then go find anyone that tried to file patents in their name. and sue them
he can do the same at the trademark office too
and then there are the devs and other people involved.

CSW could instantly sue GMax for a whole host of reasons

all CSW would need is a small amount of grace that he has some relevance to the claims he makes to prevent a patent troll case being instantly dismissed.
and then just a story worthy of granting a hearing.

yes some countries have anti-slapp rules (only ~60% of USA does)
but it seems most people dont realise that 'slapp'ing someone is possible

incase people are still unclear of the patent troll game
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation