London High Court: Craig Wright to sue Bitcoin.org operator-publisher

[JollyGood]

Cobra, the owner-operator of bitcoin.org domain is being sued in the London High Court by Craig Wright.

Wright (an Australian computer scientist) insists he is Satoshi Nakamoto and said the bitcoin.org domain is allowing his whitepaper to be downloaded without permission therefore it is copyright infringement.

It seems the only way Wright can win the case is if he can prove he is Satoshi Nakamoto. He said in the past he will provide evidence but never provided anything tangible.

If a judge declares Wright is Satoshi it will start a chain of events that nobody could have ever thought possible.

Lawyers for Cobra stated the bitcoin.org domain was not registered in the UK and claims Wright will make about the whitepaper will easily be proven to be false.

Wright lives in the UK so if he were to commence legal action it should be in the country he resides in or in his native country, he chose to do this in London. The question is "why" would he do it?

Wright successfully registered US copyright for the Bitcoin 0.1 in April 2019 and his spokesman claimed it was "the first government agency recognition of Craig Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin" but the United States Copyright Office issued their own statement with the following: "the Copyright Office does not investigate whether there is a provable connection between the claimant and the pseudonymous author."

The almost universal consensus clearly is that he is NOT the inventor of Bitcoin so what are the real reasons that are driving Wright to these lengths?

[AB de Royse777]

The almost universal consensus clearly is that he is NOT the inventor of Bitcoin so what are the real reasons that are driving Wright to these lengths?

The one and only reason is to seek attention.

The signalling theory: He had the opportunity two take two different paths of proving he is him (satoshi). One path would have been to make that exact kind of proof. Make a signature from the first Bitcoin block. Put the signature out in public. Make a very simple 10 line blog post that anyone  including <insert few names> can verify that it's him. Instead, he has taken this path where he wrote this big long blog post with 200 lines. It's so confusing that even <insert some names> said it's confusing and tried to show only to a few selected people where we are supposed to trust them.

So in general the signalling theory says, if you have a good way of proving something and a noisy way. And you chose the noisy way then that means you could not do the good way in the first place.

- Vitalik

Collected from : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLI3VIHuKU

Not a fan of Vitalik but he makes perfect sense.

[Jet Cash]

I thought he had already lost a case claiming he is SN. Didn't he have to pay several $millions as a result? Is he making money over all his rubbish claims?

[Haunebu]

Attention seeking idiot. I doubt the court will acknowledge his wild claims without tangible proof to back his wild statements. Why do you guys even share stuff related to him in the first place?

This is exactly what he wants. People are talking about him(positive or negative) which is why we need to collectively ignore him. An attention craving fool is nothing without attention.

[20kevin20]

He's likely looking to make money off as many people as possible. If he gets to be recognized as Nakamoto, the chain of events you've mentioned will probably start by him suing a lot of people who are public Bitcoin investors/devs/users for using "his" code, "his" logo, "his" project's name etc..

Besides the above, his BSV project would probably skyrocket and so he would make a sh*t ton of money off it. I really hope this doesn't happen and no judge ever rules him to be the legitimate creator of BTC. Otherwise, a lot of people would have so much headache to handle from a crappy sentence..

[nancy]

He is a clown. One of the worst person in the industry

[dothebeats]

He's so deep in his lies that the can no longer face that he's just another nob that happened to be at the right place and at the right time. I don't think his claim on the London High Court would have any bearings nor would it be something that the judges will look thoroughly given his reputation of being a liar and choosing not to directly address what was being asked of him when he was claiming to be Satoshi. The dude's just finding legal loopholes to further his claim, making it seem authentic and that's about it (the copyright bullshit he did in the US, for example).

He will never have the tangible and solid evidence of his claims. I'm hoping that he gets into more trouble and face jail time.

[Yogee]

How's the judicial process in UK? Are CW's camp required to prove that there's a probable cause for the lawsuit before any proceedings take place? I hope this is not another bluff in an attempt to stay relevant. I cannot wait for the hearing to start and finish all his drama once and for all.

[JollyGood]

The almost universal consensus clearly is that he is NOT the inventor of Bitcoin so what are the real reasons that are driving Wright to these lengths?

The one and only reason is to seek attention.

Attention seeking would lead to BSV receiving attention which in turn would push the price up so it would have monetary benefits.

I thought he had already lost a case claiming he is SN. Didn't he have to pay several $millions as a result? Is he making money over all his rubbish claims?

As far as I know the case in London versus Roger Ver in 2020 was dismissed in the initial stages by the High Court judge because he concluded London was not the place for it. Wright appealed the judgement and lost the case, again.

Attention seeking idiot. I doubt the court will acknowledge his wild claims without tangible proof to back his wild statements. Why do you guys even share stuff related to him in the first place?

This is exactly what he wants. People are talking about him(positive or negative) which is why we need to collectively ignore him. An attention craving fool is nothing without attention.

Hopefully newbies and gullible people will read these types of threads and become wiser and benefit them in the era of misinformation.

He's likely looking to make money off as many people as possible. If he gets to be recognized as Nakamoto, the chain of events you've mentioned will probably start by him suing a lot of people who are public Bitcoin investors/devs/users for using "his" code, "his" logo, "his" project's name etc..

Besides the above, his BSV project would probably skyrocket and so he would make a sh*t ton of money off it. I really hope this doesn't happen and no judge ever rules him to be the legitimate creator of BTC. Otherwise, a lot of people would have so much headache to handle from a crappy sentence..

If the Court case goes further and if the defendants present evidence showing Wright actively is trying to show himself to be the pseudonym Satoshi even though he is not - then that just might make enough problems for Wright including perjury which leads to a jail sentence.

He's so deep in his lies that the can no longer face that he's just another nob that happened to be at the right place and at the right time. I don't think his claim on the London High Court would have any bearings nor would it be something that the judges will look thoroughly given his reputation of being a liar and choosing not to directly address what was being asked of him when he was claiming to be Satoshi. The dude's just finding legal loopholes to further his claim, making it seem authentic and that's about it (the copyright bullshit he did in the US, for example).

He will never have the tangible and solid evidence of his claims. I'm hoping that he gets into more trouble and face jail time.

He certainly seems to like taking legal action or consider it. A Norway based Twitter user (Hodlonuat), Adam Back (Blockstream) and Vitalik Buterin (Ethereum co-founder) as well as Peter McCormack (journalist) and Ira Kleiman have been in the his sights. Well, the Court battle with Ira Kleiman is the important one because ownership of alleged 1.1 million Bitcoin is at the heart of that legal case. Does Wright really have over 1.1 million Bitcoin in his possession?

[stompix]

How's the judicial process in UK? Are CW's camp required to prove that there's a probable cause for the lawsuit before any proceedings take place? I hope this is not another bluff in an attempt to stay relevant.

There might be a clue on why he is doing this in one of the last phrases I read in the Guardian article.

It remains unclear whether Cobra will reveal its identity to defend the claim and avoid risking any default judgment in Wright’s favour.

The response from Cobra to Clavin seems to be also pointing in the same direction:
https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/1385239225675747332

You're wrong if you think you can bully me you creepy loser. If I have to give up my pseudonymity to defend Satoshi's whitepaper, arguably the most important paper of the 21st century, then so be it.

Even if they lose, they will just lose a copyright claim, their horde will not be diminished even by one brainwashed zombie, but they will score a point in making Cobra reveal its identity and try a new path on attacking him from there. I wonder if he can't avoid this by handing the domain temporary to one of his trusted friends or an NGO rather than going head to head with this moron.

[hatshepsut93]

I think it's not a coincidence that CWS decided to continue his patent trolling now, the selling point of his shitcoin is big blocks and supposedly low fees, and Bitcoin fees are at ATH at the moment, so CWS hopes that frustrated noobs will turn to BSV and accept him as the real Satoshi. When people get emotional, they turn blind even to the most obvious facts, and CWS knows it.

[DooMAD]

This cuts both ways.  There should be a backlash against anyone who has ever given this parasite a platform.  He wouldn't have got this far without support.  Any business or conference that endorses Faketoshi should be boycotted.  Make him as toxic to consort with as possible, so no one in their right mind would consider being associated with him again.  This farce needs to end.

[eaLiTy]

Besides the above, his BSV project would probably skyrocket and so he would make a sh*t ton of money off it. I really hope this doesn't happen and no judge ever rules him to be the legitimate creator of BTC. Otherwise, a lot of people would have so much headache to handle from a crappy sentence..

No one can produce fake documents and get away from the court system and a judge or a team of judges will not identify someone as legitimate without solid proof unless you think that those judicial systems are corrupted which is highly unlikely because the ramifications it can trigger is huge and hence there is nothing to worry about giving out a judgement without proof.

[icopress]

If that were sensible, I would easily argue with someone that this shit won't stop even after 5 years. Frankly speaking, I would not be surprised if Craig soon announces that he has lost the private keys to the main bitcoin address, lol. Let's hope the counterclaim from the Cryptocurrency Open Patent Alliance will bring this liar to clean water.

OpenCryptoOrg

oday, COPA initiated a lawsuit asking the UK High Court to declare that Mr. Craig Wright does not have copyright ownership over the Bitcoin White Paper. We stand in support of the Bitcoin developer community and the many others who've been threatened for hosting the White Paper.

[btc-room101]

He's so deep in his lies that the can no longer face that he's just another nob that happened to be at the right place and at the right time. I don't think his claim on the London High Court would have any bearings nor would it be something that the judges will look thoroughly given his reputation of being a liar and choosing not to directly address what was being asked of him when he was claiming to be Satoshi. The dude's just finding legal loopholes to further his claim, making it seem authentic and that's about it (the copyright bullshit he did in the US, for example).

He will never have the tangible and solid evidence of his claims. I'm hoping that he gets into more trouble and face jail time.

Wait a minute, the entire bitcoin narrative is lies

How is it that a liar offends so many liars?

All of BITCOIN is a lie, even Satoshi,
 
This is like Musk pushing DogeCoin, given that everything is bullshit why not do this?? Pushing DogeCoin is/was proof that any crypto, even a bullshit crypto can win the hearts & minds of the greedy crypto fools.

At best this con is just to push the narrative that there ever even was a 'satoshi'

Since Al Gore invented the internet, why is he not Satoshi?

The arguments are just like the entire narrative, how does the court prove that Satoshi never even existed? How can you prove something is false, when the mythology itself is bullshit?

The tombstone of BTC should say "Lying works, it made everyone rich".

[JollyGood]

I think that is what happened. Before any Court proceedings commence there is a hearing and it seems Wright got the permission to have it heard. Cobra will defend themselves and will win because Wright will never be able to prove he and Satoshi are the same.

At the end of the case in the summary, if the judgement is damning of Wright as a fantasist and liar he will never be able to litigate in the UK again by claiming he invented Bitcoin. If the summary is less damning by stating Wright was unable to fully prove he invented Bitcoin then it might give him more of an ego to keep going.

How's the judicial process in UK? Are CW's camp required to prove that there's a probable cause for the lawsuit before any proceedings take place? I hope this is not another bluff in an attempt to stay relevant. I cannot wait for the hearing to start and finish all his drama once and for all.

[Emitdama]

Wright successfully registered US copyright for the Bitcoin 0.1 in April 2019 and his spokesman claimed it was "the first government agency recognition of Craig Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin" but the United States Copyright Office issued their own statement with the following: "the Copyright Office does not investigate whether there is a provable connection between the claimant and the pseudonymous author."

The almost universal consensus clearly is that he is NOT the inventor of Bitcoin so what are the real reasons that are driving Wright to these lengths?

I don’t know if this guy ever gets tired of doing things that are really stupid as he’s doing right now, seriously it’s very annoying , every time he is on the news for things that are not making any sense at all. Before he talks about suing Cobra, he should first of all bring the proof that he is the real Satoshi Nakamoto. If he can prove that to the world that he’s the real Satoshi, then nobody is going to question him for every decisions and actions that’ he makes. But as for now, he’s not the Satoshi Nakamoto, so he’s saying nonsense. He’s already losing this battle, just that he ashamed to quit and is being stupid at the same time.

[kryptqnick]

I think what this guy is doing is basically being a copyright troll. He sues various people and organizations, claiming that he's Satoshi and has the right to all of this stuff, but this just means that people lose money on lawyers and time on their court hearings, whereas he gets more publicity in the end.
I don't understand why he's still not imprisoned because clearly he failed to prove being Satoshi and failed to deliver money to the Kleiman family. He also was a part of some shady cases like basically accidentally claiming that he was involved in the Mt. Gox hack.

[suzanne5223]

The question is "why" would he do it?

I believe he doing this to pump the price of his Shitcoin or make people believe BSV is the real Bitcoin because his ambition is usually the same thing as Ver and others which always plan to make people look away from Bitcoin but what I don't understand is how strong the power force behind him because he's technically not doing this alone.
In the meantime, I think the Bitcoin need to do something to shut this man from making further false claim.

[/i]" but the United States Copyright Office issued their own statement with the following: "the Copyright Office does not investigate whether there is a provable connection between the claimant and the pseudonymous author."

This people need to sue why won't they do an investigation and this looks like he (Craig Wright) paid them to do it but they claim not to investigate in other to save themselves from future issues.

[Similificator]

Good read, merited.

Now about this ridiculous guy, Craig Wright. I believe this guy just wants to gain as much attention as he can. Going through all this bullcrap just to prove a point that isn't even needed by anyone in this industry. One just can't imagine what goes on inside the heads of people like this guy. He is clearly making a fool out of himself. He may already be seen by the majority as a laughingstock. I wouldn't even be surprised if the court never takes his case seriously. Man what a guy. Sigh*