Donate to Cøbra (pending court battle against Craig Wright)

[dkbit98]

According to court papers, they hired private investigators to find out my identity. As expected those investigators failed to find anything. Going into a lawsuit completely blind is beyond stupid, especially when your claim is very weak.

omg he even hired private investigators and they are probably scanning every word you ever wrote online on twitter and forum to find some clues
That means that anyone can claim to be you and even some puppet he hired to be fake Cøbra who loses the case in theory just for Faketoshi to claim his pyrrhic victory, and I don't understand how court can really confirm identity.

The best intellectual property law firm in the UK is actively working on this whitepaper issue. He is outgunned legally.

It's good thing that COPA filled a lawsuit against him and I don't think he has any chance in court except if he finds some corrupt judge that is willing to take some bribe.

[1714840993]

1714840993

[1714840993]

1714840993

[1714840993]

1714840993

[1714840993]

1714840993

[1714840993]

1714840993

[1714840993]

1714840993

[PrimeNumber7]

What crimes do you think CSW has committed? Making accusations in court is typically protected speech, as long as the person does not lie while under oath. Lawyers filing frivolous lawsuits can be subject to sanctions, but this will not affect the client. I don't follow CSW's story very closely, but I have followed it closely enough to conclude that I believe he is not satoshi.

You already answered your own question. Identity theft and lying under oath are two of his many crimes.

While I don't believe CSW is not satoshi (in fact I believe CSW is not satoshi), I cannot prove this to be true. The absence of proof that a statement is true is not evidence the statement is false. Similarly, attempts to fraudulently prove a statement to be true is not evidence the statement is false, although it may be evidence the person presenting the fraudulent evidence should not be trusted.

The above distinction is important because, in order to convict someone of lying under oath, the prosecution needs to prove the statement is false. There isn't anyone else claiming to be satoshi, not even satohsi Nakamoto himself. The same principle applies to identity theft. I think it is plausible that Dave Kleiman is satoshi, that CSW knows this and that no one will ever be able to prove they CSW is not satoshi, however, it is also possible that the litigation between Kleiman's estate and Wright was an effort to give credence to Wright being satoshi (I did not follow the litigation closely, nor am I aware of its outcome).

I have long suspected that satoshi no longer has access to his cryptic keys, either because he is dead, in jail, or for whatever reason lost access to his keys. I think if satoshi did have access to his keys, and is not CSW, he would have presented a signed message saying that Wright is not satoshi by now.

Another disadvantage for them is the publicity this case is attracting. If he wins this case, he is legally recognized as Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin. He's asserting he has "database rights" to the Bitcoin ledger. He asserts he owns the "Bitcoin" name. He'll inevitably claim the Satoshi coins. This is why he fights so hard to get a court to declare him as Satoshi, so he can begin enforcing these claims against exchanges, wallets, developers, etc. Obviously he will lose, but I suppose he's deluded himself and his followers into believing this is a viable strategy to take BSV to the moon. But there are just too many eyes on this, and too much money in this space to allow someone like him to even have the chance to legally assume the Satoshi moniker and associated intellectual property. The best intellectual property law firm in the UK is actively working on this whitepaper issue. He is outgunned legally.

If Wright were to actually prove he is satoshi in court in his case against you, he should be able to easily enforce any rights associated with being satoshi has (I am hesitant to believe satoshi has many rights -- see my below comment). However, if for example, Wright were to win a default judgment against you, and the court were to rule that he is in fact satoshi, he would not be able to enforce any associated rights (if this were the case, he could simply sue someone friendly to him in order to have a court rule in his favor). I think BSV has insane technical specifications, but I also think CSW probably also owns an outsized number of BSV coin via being a major miner of that coin. CSW probably doesn't own the same number of BSV coin that satoshi mined of bitcoin, but he probably has a lot of BSV. I think if CSW were to win a case against a major bitcoin figure, the price of BSV would increase a lot. I have commented before as to why CSW might win a case, and it is not because of actual merit.

In the very unlikely event that Wright was able to legitimately prove he is in fact satoshi, he very clearly should not have any rights over the bitcoin software, or the bitcoin database/ledger (commonly known as the blockchain), as satoshi's very first commit of the bitcoin software code explicitly said it was distributed under an MIT license. The whitepaper was appearently included in the original code files, but it is less explicit that the whitepaper was published under the MIT license.

[pooya87]

While I don't believe CSW is not satoshi (in fact I believe CSW is not satoshi), I cannot prove this to be true. The absence of proof that a statement is true is not evidence the statement is false. Similarly, attempts to fraudulently prove a statement to be true is not evidence the statement is false, although it may be evidence the person presenting the fraudulent evidence should not be trusted.

You are right but proof is an entirely different matter. The person making a claim must prove their claim not the others. When someone is pulling identity fraud they have to prove the identity they claim they have is their real identity not others prove they are lying.
That also doesn't change the fact that he is a criminal.

The rest is just legal shenanigans that Craig Scammer Wright is using to disrupt bitcoin by attacking individuals and forcing them to waste their precious time defending a nonsense. That just proves the flaw in our legal systems.

[PrimeNumber7]

While I don't believe CSW is not satoshi (in fact I believe CSW is not satoshi), I cannot prove this to be true. The absence of proof that a statement is true is not evidence the statement is false. Similarly, attempts to fraudulently prove a statement to be true is not evidence the statement is false, although it may be evidence the person presenting the fraudulent evidence should not be trusted.

You are right but proof is an entirely different matter. The person making a claim must prove their claim not the others. When someone is pulling identity fraud they have to prove the identity they claim they have is their real identity not others prove they are lying.
That also doesn't change the fact that he is a criminal.

When someone is being charged with a crime, such as identity theft or perjury, it is up to the prosecution to prove the person is either stealing someone's identity or lied under oath.

The original question was: What crimes do you think CSW has committed? In order for Wright to have any influence, or assert any rights for being satoshi, he will need to in fact prove that he is satoshi. However, if a government were to charge him with a crime for falsely claiming to be satoshi, the prosecution will need to prove that Wright is in fact not satoshi.

I get that CSW is not very popular in this forum, and I have a very low opinion of him myself. However being unpopular does not mean you should not have your due process rights.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

Pretty noble endeavor but I don't think that Cøbra needs the help right now, plus we all have our own problems right now and I think that we can't afford putting other people's plight before ours. Nonetheless, Cøbra will win this because CSW is a fake ass and the only thing that keeps this fake afloat is the money that he gets from this lawsuits.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Pretty noble endeavor but I don't think that Cøbra needs the help right now, plus we all have our own problems right now and I think that we can't afford putting other people's plight before ours.

Many, many people can afford to donate to what I consider a worthy cause. I donated £50 worth of BTC myself.

[DaRude]

Pretty noble endeavor but I don't think that Cøbra needs the help right now, plus we all have our own problems right now and I think that we can't afford putting other people's plight before ours. Nonetheless, Cøbra will win this because CSW is a fake ass and the only thing that keeps this fake afloat is the money that he gets from this lawsuits.

Instructions weren't clear, will donate now.

[DooMAD]

a good initiative but i think a much better movement is if we started a campaign forcing all exchanges to remove BSV from their trading pairs. according to coinmarketcap.com there are still a lot of them that offer the trading pair for this scam coin.

to name a few big names according to their volume and popularity: Huobi, OKEx, HitBTC, Poloniex, BiOne, KuCoin, Bitfinex, Bittrex, Gate.io, Bithumb and Binance Jex.

although this shitcoin has been dumping for over a year now but all these exchanges are providing liquidity to the scammer who would then use the funds to sue people and also cause disruption in bitcoin's development (like suing bitcoin devs).

Indeed.  We also need to apply pressure to conferences, as they provide an audience for him to propagandise in front of.  It needs to be a total embargo.

Where do we begin?

[japanese2212]

3 billion he is asking fabricating belonnhs to me. I bet he cant prove where did the rest 19990 coins went from that 12id wallet. Well no worries i lost my email account but the key. Hopefully it is still on that electric wire and underneath many tables in that old school. Also other 5 worth 4 bill is also there... hopefully by next year it will all go away and csw will still pursue to come and examine the writing on the wite and the tables...good luck...

[hacker1001101001]

So did we loose ? What's next ? Remove the WhitePaper or let the dogs bark ?

[franky1]

So did we loose ? What's next ? Remove the WhitePaper or let the dogs bark ?

"we"? nope
there is no community loss.. CSW achieved nothing more than any old lady could,,,

just like fridgit old woman who complain to TV stations to not show sexualised tv shows before 9pm. that old lady does not need to own the tv show or any porn to make a claim to stop someone displaying something.

all it means is a website cannot display a document.

it is not proof of ownership of document or anything else
other websites including government sites have already started displaying the whitepaper as a act of defiance against CSW.
cobra only lost his websites case to display it because cobra didnt want to turn up and identify himself
hundreds of corporations and government sites are not afraid of revealing themselves and putting CSW back in his cave if he tried to sue them

there is also a group that sued CSW to provide proof of ID

[hacker1001101001]

cobra only lost his websites case to display it because cobra didnt want to turn up and identify himself

This is like kicking in the ass of anonymity. Even when there was no solid proof from other side to sue Cøbra.

But, anyways I admire Cøbra's firmness of not giving a shit.

I was just here to confirm if the WhitePaper would still be there on Bitcoin.org.

[pooya87]

That court's jurisdiction doesn't extend beyond Britain so it can't force bitcoin.org to do anything, which I believe is why Cobra didn't give a shit about it.
In any case it seems like the purpose of this shenanigan was either to deanonymize Cobra and make some money in the process. The later was the only achievement since they tried so hard and pumped BSV only 20% which is funny because if it were any other shitcoin the pump would have been above 1000%. This also shows that the amount of crap people give to this shitcoin is also decreasing.

[gmaxwell]

in order to convict someone of lying under oath, the prosecution needs to prove the statement is false.

Fortunately, in service of Wright's big fraud Wright commits lots of smaller frauds, and some of those are provable to a very high degree.  In the Florida federal case wright was already judicially found to have fabricated evidence and committed perjury.  Unfortunately, so far the only direct consequence is a few hundred grand in penalties and some adverse inferences.

But he's also engaging in the same kind of ultimately provable perjury in every other case. If you look at the history of conmen you'll see that it often takes years for them to be brought to justice.

At this point I also wouldn't bet that that his core fraud couldn't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt-- the primary challenging blocking that is just the lack of criminal investigation powers.  Keep in mind: even though there is so much evidence of his fraud out there, he ultimately published almost all of it himself-- his discovery was self-produced!  We haven't even started to see the kind of stuff that will get exposed by a real investigation, where he can't stuff the record with forgeries produced on the spot or hide things he doesn't like.  If this crap is what he wants the world to see, consider what he doesn't want the world to see?  Consider what testimony might become available when his supporters are facing the risk of criminal prosecution and jail time themselves?

Somehow people get mixed up about what proof means in a criminal context:  We convict people of murder all the time, yet none are ever proved guilty in a strong mathematical sense.  Instead, we have the body, the motive, the fingerprint covered murder weapon, maybe a video recording, even when there there is a confession that isn't a mathematical-sense proof-- false confessions are common... Secret government agents could always have planted the evidence, drugged the witnesses, and faked the video. But enough of it and no reasonable doubt remains. The standard of proof isn't absolutely no doubt, we don't require that anything but guilt be a logical impossibility.

In Wright's case, his numerous forgeries and lies are the bloody murder weapon, the victims that funded his Nigerian scam on the basis of of his promise to dump bitcoin and buy BSV are the body, his tax rebate fraud, profits, efforts to steal Bitcoins (in his lawsuit against developers), his upcoming efforts to steal bitcoin.org show his motives, and so on.

Personally, now having seen what is public now I have absolutely no reasonable doubt.  I know that is also true for many of the the people who've been around a long time and seen the evidence.

[buwaytress]

Thanks OP for making this thread and Cobra for responding.

I initially didn't think too much of the issue but overlooked the fact that you could very well be doxed and then dragged through painful and expensive litigation.

I do think there must be a lot of other options we can't yet see and perhaps even there must be someone out there willing to take on this case to defend pro bono.

Bitcoin has been good to me though. I will feel obliged to at least put tangible support behind this. Let's see how serious it really is first or how far it is legally able to go.

[NotATether]

So did we loose ? What's next ? Remove the WhitePaper or let the dogs bark ?

We should add mirror link of the whitepaper with how to retrieve it. Aside from another website, the whitepaper also available on IPFS & Bitcoin Blockchain.

Craig can claw it out of my cold dead heads.

https://notatether.com/bitcoin.pdf

[Obito]

Too sad that freedom has lost over a kangaroo court with this one. Hopefully @Cøbra will receive enough donations to help shoulder the fines and fees that @Cobra might incur in this bullshit case by Faketoshi. I have suggested on the other thread about this that we should have the copy of the whitepaper and then post it in our respective websites just to annoy CSW, also, will there be any implications if a lot of people were to do this that's from a different country?

[gmaxwell]

then post it in our respective websites just to annoy CSW,

Make sure you post it alongside your choice of Bitcoin node software (e.g. bitcoin core, btcd, libbitcoin, etc) or more than one.  When people started posting the whitepaper previously wright tried to deflect the loss of face by saying that these people were really endorsing has scam bitcoin clone.  By posting it along with a node software mirror (ideally source code, since that's what people need to maintain their own copy) you will refute his deflection and protect the availability of the most important parts of the system.
 

[PrimeNumber7]

in order to convict someone of lying under oath, the prosecution needs to prove the statement is false.

Fortunately, in service of Wright's big fraud Wright commits lots of smaller frauds, and some of those are provable to a very high degree.  In the Florida federal case wright was already judicially found to have fabricated evidence and committed perjury.  Unfortunately, so far the only direct consequence is a few hundred grand in penalties and some adverse inferences.

If CSW has been found guilty of perjury, or a judge has fined him for making false statements, this is good for Cøbra because anyone who has a history of being punished for perjury is going to have little credibility in the courtroom.

At this point I also wouldn't bet that that his core fraud couldn't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt-- the primary challenging blocking that is just the lack of criminal investigation powers.  Keep in mind: even though there is so much evidence of his fraud out there, he ultimately published almost all of it himself-- his discovery was self-produced!  We haven't even started to see the kind of stuff that will get exposed by a real investigation, where he can't stuff the record with forgeries produced on the spot or hide things he doesn't like.  If this crap is what he wants the world to see, consider what he doesn't want the world to see?  Consider what testimony might become available when his supporters are facing the risk of criminal prosecution and jail time themselves?

I have honestly not closely followed most CSW cases, and haven't spent more than a half dozen hours (over the many years he has spent litigating various cases) reviewing related court documents. My experience is that CSW likes to take advantage of the lack of technical expertise by lawyers and judges, and will respond in a way that may not answer the question directly, but the answer looks favorable to him; the lawyers may not pickup on the difference between the question and answer because of the lack of technical expertise. This is more obvious to those who have at least intermediate expertise in how cryptography works and how bitcoin works.

I believe the above is why CSW is so willing to allow so much evidence of potential fraud to be out there, as it is obvious to experts, but not so obvious to those who may impose consequences for fraud. You may be right though, it is possible there is more bad stuff that CSW is hiding.

Somehow people get mixed up about what proof means in a criminal context:  We convict people of murder all the time, yet none are ever proved guilty in a strong mathematical sense.  Instead, we have the body, the motive, the fingerprint covered murder weapon, maybe a video recording, even when there there is a confession that isn't a mathematical-sense proof-- false confessions are common... Secret government agents could always have planted the evidence, drugged the witnesses, and faked the video. But enough of it and no reasonable doubt remains. The standard of proof isn't absolutely no doubt, we don't require that anything but guilt be a logical impossibility.

You are correct, I should have been more clear in my previous post that it needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that CSW lied under oath in order for him to be found guilty of perjury. People have been convicted of murder without a body, murder weapon, or a video.

I believe it would be difficult to prove someone guilty of perjury for claiming to be a particular anonymous person that is only known by their forum handle/alias without bringing that person forward.

When CSW first claimed to be satoshi, he provided evidence he was satoshi to Gavin Anderson, only that the evidence provided was deceptive and did not actually point to CSW potentially being satoshi (had CSW attempted to gain anything of value out of the meeting, it would likely have been fraud). While this interaction makes me believe that CSW is not satoshi, I don't believe it proves this. CSW could argue in court that he no longer has access to cryptographic keys that would prove satoshi's identity.

[vapourminer]

i think it would be hilarious if that court ordered fine were paid to the genesis block. after all satoshi (the real one) has the key to that addy, and it would (possibly?) satisfy the court order. because while even satoshi himself cant spend the 50 btc coinbase reward, he can spend all the stuff thats been sent there since.

although then again it would add some small amount legitimacy to his scam. so maybe not.

i believe this is called "malicious compliance" and im all for it when there are no other options.