Satoshi’s Bitcoin whitepaper to be removed from Bitcoin.org?

[shahzadafzal]

In the recent court hearing in UK this clown "Craig Wright" and self claimed Bitcoin inventor has won the lawsuit over bitcoin whitepaper copyright claim against Cobra and Court has ordered Cøbra to remove the whitepaper from bitcoin.org website and display the court judgment notice and pay fine.

This is so unfortune, it's true we might differences with Cøbra over many things but I think this time we need to support him. Whatever we can do or even if "theymos" can do to prevent this to happen.

"In a remote hearing today, a judge said that “Cøbra,” the pseudonymous operator of Bitcoin.org, must display a notice on his website about the judgment, pay at least £35,000 ($48,600) in legal costs and remove the whitepaper from his site. Cøbra lost the case through a default judgment; he mounted no defense to preserve his pseudonymity."

There is short reply from Cøbra on this hearing



https://decrypt.co/74657/bitcoin-inventor-whitepaper-lawsuit-craig-wright-cobra

[Lee_Mire]

Since when was the whitepaper intellectual property? This judgement is beyond absurd.

[ranochigo]

The court case wasn't contested by the defendant and that was the default judgement. It doesn't necessarily mean that the claims were valid.

It depends on how the IP laws is enacted within the jurisdiction that the website is hosted in. At best, it wouldn't be taken down completely. Just that the site or parts of it won't be accessible within the UK, assuming that Cobra is unwilling to comply.

[NeuroticFish]

From my tiny understanding on how legal system works, Cøbra should be able to appeal. But this may mean to give his identity. 
On the other hand, if bitcoin.org cannot host the whitepaper, maybe they can still link to it? Because there were plenty of powerful Bitcoin companies that were showing support and hosting the white paper.

[mocacinno]

I'm defenately not a lawyer (far from it), but as far as i understand, it was a UK court making a UK decission that should not impact anybody not doing business/living in the UK...
I'm not even sure the UK can force Cøbra to reject UK visitors....

In my country, the pirate bay was banned... What they had to do is force ISP's to change their DNS so the pirate bay domain name would resolve to a warning page hosted by my country... They could not force the operators of the pirate bay to reject users based on their ip block... Why? Because the operators of the pirate bay were ROTFLOL when my country asked them to do this, waving with a piece of paper telling them their site was illegal IN MY COUNTRY, whilst they were living in a completely different country...

But, like i said: i'm not a lawyer... maybe someone with some actual legal background can enlighten us?

[Obito]

Maybe another anonymous user might be able to host the whitepaper again just to annoy Faketoshi. I think what Cøbra did was a good thing though, preserving his anonymity in that time because this take down isn't going to be permanent and a lot of Cøbra sympathizers would probably post the whitepaper somewhere out there.

[DdmrDdmr]

I haven’t managed to get hold of the official Court ruling, which, since it has not yet apparently been officially handed to Cøbra’s defence team, it may therefore take some days to be accesible. The source of all this information is currently focused on Ontier’s press releases.

This part relates to the ruling (similar of course to that depicted in the OP):

His Honour Judge Hodge QC, sitting as a Judge of the Chancery Division, heard Dr Wright’s application today 28 June 2021, following which the Court granted Dr Wright’s request: (1) for an injunction prohibiting the Defendant from infringing Dr Wright’s copyright in the United Kingdom whether by making the White Paper available for download from the bitcoin.org website or in any other way; and (2) for an order requiring the Defendant to publish a copy of the Court’s order on the bitcoin.org website for 6 months. The Court also ordered that there be an inquiry as to damages caused by the Defendant’s infringement of Dr Wright’s copyright in the UK and that ‘Cøbra’ makes an interim payment on account of Dr Wright’s cost of the proceedings.

See: https://www.ontier.digital/post/uk-court-awards-bitcoin-creator-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-copyright-infringement-claim

It does seem that the scope is restricted to the UK, so I figure that the site, were it to comply, would need to block access to the whitepaper by IP geolocalization. Since the whitepaper is in multiple languages, I wonder if it would apply to all language versions currently accessible from the Uk on Bitcoin.org.

[tranthidung]

What’s up with Cøbra?
You also should know that Cobra want (vague reveals but it seems like that) to sell Bitcoin.org domain (in last year).

theymos, the head admin of our forum, choose a good move to separate the forum with Bitcoin.org website and Cobra.
Domain name update

It is why the hyperlink to update wallet at the top is directed to https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.

[so98nn]

From my tiny understanding on how legal system works, Cøbra should be able to appeal. But this may mean to give his identity. 
On the other hand, if bitcoin.org cannot host the whitepaper, maybe they can still link to it? Because there were plenty of powerful Bitcoin companies that were showing support and hosting the white paper.

This can only be understood in full once the notice is published by him on the website or may be available through public grievance. The appeal will justify whole thing, like the legal language "no part of the white-paper shall be displayed on the site neither accessible by any means of whatsoever, displayed ads, tabs, sections or sub-sections lead to the white-paper". and blah blah. They will have it crafted that way and they always do because they literally think about it based on how much they getting paid by appealer. Lolz. That's how the court works. After all they also need to feed their salaries, isn't it. 

[shahzadafzal]

If he wins this case, he is legally recognized as Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin.

I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?

[tranthidung]

I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?

Another attempt to double or tripple FUD.

Craig Wright is not and will never be recognized as Bitcoin founder. Never. He was detected by many plagiarism attempts. It makes sense to wipe out any attempt from him or any governments that support Craig Wright.

Craig Wright Accused of Plagiarism Again. Cointelegraph is a shit online newspaper but you can dig more to find more researches about Craig Wright plagiarism.

[ziennakarishma21]

I also read the news about Cøbra and they said that Cøbra and Marquardt are the same individual, but both sides denied it. It seems that a lot of news and public opinion has affected Cøbra. If he does not stand up to appeal, the only way is to suffer strong blows from the law and public opinion.

[Kittygalore]

I also read the news about Cøbra and they said that Cøbra and Marquardt are the same individual, but both sides denied it. It seems that a lot of news and public opinion has affected Cøbra. If he does not stand up to appeal, the only way is to suffer strong blows from the law and public opinion.

You know how news always wants to get the scoop no matter how scummy they look, if it gets them clicks then they will fabricate any stories and sell their mothers, there's no good journalism in this day and age.

[solosequenosenada]

This does not end here, there are people who want to prove what we all already know, that Mr. Craig Wright is a fucking fraud and always will be...

Faketoshi !

Today, 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.

https://twitter.com/opencryptoorg/status/1381642092624015360

[ranochigo]

I'm defenately not a lawyer (far from it), but as far as i understand, it was a UK court making a UK decission that should not impact anybody not doing business/living in the UK...
I'm not even sure the UK can force Cøbra to reject UK visitors....

In my country, the pirate bay was banned... What they had to do is force ISP's to change their DNS so the pirate bay domain name would resolve to a warning page hosted by my country... They could not force the operators of the pirate bay to reject users based on their ip block... Why? Because the operators of the pirate bay were ROTFLOL when my country asked them to do this, waving with a piece of paper telling them their site was illegal IN MY COUNTRY, whilst they were living in a completely different country...

But, like i said: i'm not a lawyer... maybe someone with some actual legal background can enlighten us?

The jurisdiction shouldn't extend to the rest of EU, after brexit AFAIK. UK can instruct their ISPs to selectively redirect traffic directed to that website to their own to enforce censorship like what they've done before. Problem being, if Cobra's identity remains hidden that is nothing that they can do. Especially if the location of their servers is located in a country where IP laws doesn't apply.

[Wexnident]

If he wins this case, he is legally recognized as Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin.

I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?

The court didn't accept the claim that he was Satoshi afaik. Cobra didn't defend himself so CSW won the court case by default since Cobra didn't want to reveal his identity from what I understood. Now what's confusing is did the court accept the side of CSW about his claim being Satoshi and writing the white paper, or did the court just, well, defaulted and didn't really bother identifying whether his sides' claims were true or not. Though it seems to be saying that CSW owns the paper just based on the decision they made since I don't think a punishment would've been handed out if the court didn't agree with CSW (Correct me if I'm wrong, idk much about court cases)

[slaman29]

Like Cobra said, all the more reason to prove why Bitcoin is needed. I can't believe that clown is still forcing himself upon the community. Worse, I can't believe he actually has droves of supporters still crazy enough to fall for him.

Then again, I've seen enough of this world to know I should believe all that is happening.

[ranochigo]

The court didn't accept the claim that he was Satoshi afaik. Cobra didn't defend himself so CSW won the court case by default since Cobra didn't want to reveal his identity from what I understood. Now what's confusing is did the court accept the side of CSW about his claim being Satoshi and writing the white paper, or did the court just, well, defaulted and didn't really bother identifying whether his sides' claims were true or not. Though it seems to be saying that CSW owns the paper just based on the decision they made since I don't think a punishment would've been handed out if the court didn't agree with CSW (Correct me if I'm wrong, idk much about court cases)

The section of default ruling: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part12

As Cobra chose to not compromise his privacy (by filing an opposition or through a legal representative), the court reached the default ruling. This doesn't mean that CSW's claims were valid, it is just that they weren't (able to be) disputed in the court so there isn't any meaning to that. From what I understand, there was a written defense by Cobra (?) but it didn't matter.

[BrewMaster]

I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?

no the court didn't accept he is Satoshi Nakamoto. the scammer went to court and made a claim, the court set a date and asked the other party (cobra) to attend. they didn't attend so automatically the court ruled in favor of the scammer.

this only means that cobra wanted to protect their privacy and didn't want to give the scammer the satisfaction of doxing them.

[stompix]

It would take only 5k S19pro or M30+ to finally get rid of that shitcoin sv fork.....just saying   

The jurisdiction shouldn't extend to the rest of EU, after brexit AFAIK. UK can instruct their ISPs to selectively redirect traffic directed to that website to their own to enforce censorship like what they've done before.

Even if the UK was still in the EU it wouldn't have mattered as a rule by default wouldn't have carried effects in other states jurisdiction, nor normally should that lead to any ISP accepting that request. If an ISP refuses to block access Faketoshi would have to file a copyright claim them and if this time the ISP does send its lawyers the judge will have to verify Faketoshi claims of his copyright infringement, which of course he wouldn't be able to provide.

This whole thing went wrong in the first place, much like the censorship on youtube, someone makes a claim, you don't make a counter you lose, doesn't matter if the other guy is a liar, you showed no willingness to defend yourself. Well, that sucks...but that is his decision, that's how things stand right now.