No..Craig Wright Was NOT Named Bitcoin's Creator

[titular]

Here we go again with these news outlets. As many of you have maybe read, Craig Wright won the lawsuit in Miami over a dispute over $50,000,000,000 in bitcoin. This issue is the media is writing misleading headlines suggesting Craig Wright won a lawsuit over whether he was bitcoin's creator or not. They continue to lace their articles with misleading notions suggesting the lawsuit was over whether CW is Satoshi or not.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/06/miami-jury-rules-in-favor-of-craig-wright-bitcoin-claimed-inventor.html

https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/12/24467590/bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-craig-wright-alone-according-to-kleiman-v-wright-jury

Please please please read the entire article before making assumptions. We already have people in the IRC and Reddit spreading FUD regarding these headlines.

We all know what he has to do to prove he is who he says he is.

[1715081448]

1715081448

[1715081448]

1715081448

[1715081448]

1715081448

[Obito]

People still read this news articles? In this day and age, we don't see any journalists that delivers the truth if it doesn't further their own agenda so I don't know why people still read this articles, this is a bait title so you can be intrigued and click their article and read it, it is intended to be misleading.

[Pffrt]

People still read this news articles?

It's interesting to see how much desperate CW is to prove himself as satoshi. I read those article to get informed what he is doing exactly. Well, whatever they do, whatever they have, they can't prove CW as satoshi unless CW can sign a message from one of known address of satoshi.

[gmaxwell]

It's really sad how readily "journalists" repeat whatever disinformation is shoveled at them.

An accurate headline would be "Faux Bitcoin-creator found liable for $100m in damages due to stealing from dead friend's company."

Unfortunately there is a massive disinformation campaign on all fronts on this... and as a result even earnest Bitcoiners are getting confused and repeating some falsehoods.

No. No one was found to be Satoshi. The court wasn't even looking at that.  No, wright did not "win"-- he has been ordered to pay $100 million dollars which will bankrupt him many times over (unless he's able to get a bailout from a sucker who he can promise future 'satoshi bitcoin' to...).

Wright's damages are because he raided the assets of his friends company by filing a lawsuit against it in AU and then showing up as the defendant himself to concede the lawsuit.  The argument that wright won is because the estate also demanded half of Wright's obviously fictional Bitcoin and it appears the jury didn't buy the existence of that Bitcoin and so they didn't award anything thing.

Rather than supporting Wright's claims, the case brutally refuted them.  Including proving mountains of Wright produced documents to be forgeries.  The argument made by Wright's attorney in closing was essentially a chewbacca defense: They argued that wright is a fantasist and that it didn't make sense for the plaintiff to rely on Wright's forgeries as proof, and kept chanting "if it doesn't make sense you go with the defense".

Probably the highlight of the case was when Wright was ordered by the court under threat of being held in contempt to identify and swear to which specific bitcoin he owned in 2013 and he provided a list just before the deadline-- only to have the real owners of thousands of bitcoins on it immediately show up with digital signatures calling Wright a liar and a fraud.  But it's hard to pick one.  Wright made a total clown of himself so many times over that it's hard to choose.

[mk4]

As if we didn't think that typical "journalists" stoop down low enough with these misleading or outright false article titles. Unfortunately this would cause a lot of people(the normies) on social media to think that Faketoshi is going to dump the coins or something.

Also, they could literally call Faketoshi anything; but the fact is, he doesn't have access to Satoshi's keys so it wouldn't really change anything.

[fiulpro]

Funny part is :

However, Wright was ordered to pay $100 million in compensatory damages over a breach in intellectual property rights related to W&K Info Defense Research LLC, a joint venture between the two men. That money will go to W&K directly, rather than to the Kleiman estate.

-taken from the article you mentioned

The guy did not win the title of Satoshi ofcourse but he did win the whole case, but I won't say whole but partial perse since he still has to pay money.

Journalists have no idea about the whole bitcoin community perse and at the same time sometimes people might pay them to make such statements.

We all know that the man is not Satoshi ofcourse but at the same time I have also seen these FUD's stirring around and the articles calling him Satoshi as well.

-Not his keys!! Not his Coins!!

[tyz]

I really wonder why anyone gives this man any attention at all. It should be known that he is definitely not Satoshi.
The proof would be easy to make, but he can't. So he isn't. This smear theater he's putting on doesn't do justice to the real Satoshi.

[24Kt]

I really wonder why anyone gives this man any attention at all. It should be known that he is definitely not Satoshi.
The proof would be easy to make, but he can't. So he isn't. This smear theater he's putting on doesn't do justice to the real Satoshi.

People are giving attention to him especially those newcomers because they are reading misleading information. They thought that Craig Wright won and that he's the bitcoin creator. But the good thing about winning on his case, he said, if he will win on this trial, he will prove his bitcoin ownership. So this is very interesting if he can indeed prove about those btc holdings. If he can't, then, this is just another shameful act from him. Because I have the feeling that he can't prove his ownership to satoshi's bitcoins because he is not Satoshi.

[taufik123]

Craig Wright is just a bullshit man who claims to be the inventor of bitcoin. No one believed this old man, but he felt certain that he was the inventor. he couldn't prove anything about the invention of bitcoin to date.
Craig Wright never had the access key to the satoshi wallet.

[DarkDays]

People still read this news articles? In this day and age, we don't see any journalists that delivers the truth if it doesn't further their own agenda so I don't know why people still read this articles, this is a bait title so you can be intrigued and click their article and read it, it is intended to be misleading.

Well, news outlets are all about headlines.  It is their bread and butter!!! It is all about grabbing attention, getting people to read these ridiculous articles even if they're often biased, misleading and not representative.

Seems to me that if you've been around long enough you understand that what media says is not exactly true, and this is no different (though, I wish more people were using their heads and not believe everything they read)...

In this case, of course Craig hasn't proved a thing and never will. We all know just how simple proving ownership of Bitcoin is and yet this had never been done.

[kawetsriyanto]

No one believed this old man, but he felt certain that he was the inventor.

Well, all crypto enthusiasts must know who Craig Wright is. He is an annoying man, a fake Satoshi who tried to attract people's attention to his business. We already ignore whatever he did. But seeing media endorses Craig Wright as a real Satoshi is very funny, who they are?  And how can they decide who Satoshi is? This is totally wrong and execrable, even all discussions in this forum cannot find out any signs of the real Satoshi is. I mean the media has no capacity to write on who Satoshi is, they have no strong reasons.

[Sterbens]

Well, I've read the article you verified. But the content you already know in the media from CNBC is just distorting the facts. Because they are government media that claim to be independent, is that true?

Craig Wright always stands out like he is......... ah I don't want to say that because I don't recognize him as anyone. Then the media so often treat this to divert the real issue.

Remember one thing we need to instill in future generations, That Satoshi is not he, he and she..... Not anyone who claims to be Satoshi. It does not exist and will never be recognized. Why ? because the hero will not reveal his true identity (Unless you are watching the Marvel Series). Even though we don't know who he is, the most important thing is that Bitcoin is still Bitcoin even though it is in a block of opposite Blockchain.

[Rikafip]

I really wonder why anyone gives this man any attention at all. It should be known that he is definitely not Satoshi.
The proof would be easy to make, but he can't. So he isn't. This smear theater he's putting on doesn't do justice to the real Satoshi.

To be honest, that guy shouldn't  even be mentioned on this forum as what he wants and enjoy in is attention. And if we can tell anyiting about Satoshi and the way he tied to keep his privacy, he obviously wanted as little attention as possible. Therefore, conclusion about CSW is obvious.

[aoluain]

Funny part is :

However, Wright was ordered to pay $100 million in compensatory damages over a breach in intellectual property rights related to W&K Info Defense Research LLC, a joint venture between the two men. That money will go to W&K directly, rather than to the Kleiman estate.

-taken from the article you mentioned

The guy did not win the title of Satoshi ofcourse but he did win the whole case, but I won't say whole but partial perse since he still has to pay money.

Journalists have no idea about the whole bitcoin community perse and at the same time sometimes people might pay them to make such statements.

We all know that the man is not Satoshi ofcourse but at the same time I have also seen these FUD's stirring around and the articles calling him Satoshi as well.

-Not his keys!! Not his Coins!!

Talking about journalists, they dont have a clue about Bitcoin.^{full stop}

They dont care about the truth or facts in this case, its lazy journalism,
grab some crap from the internet and run with it.

Apologies in advance for this but here is an example of some absolute embarrasing
thrash from 2016 which showed up in my news feed today, somebody/something
assumed this was relevant to the recent courtcase and that I needed to read,
 this is nonsense upon nonsence which people are being fed>

https://m.independent.ie/business/technology/news/identity-of-inventor-of-bitcoin-creator-finally-revealed-as-craig-wright-34676862.html

The creator was previously known under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto to protect his identity, but he has now been named as Australian Dr Craig Wright.

The computer scientist, inventor and academic launched the protocol in 2009 and his identity was shrouded in mystery.

Dr Wright said he decided to reveal himself as the Bitcoin creator to stop the spread of "misinformation" about the cryptocurrency and its digital infrastructure Blockchain.

The scientist has digitally signed messages to prove his identity, and Jon Matonis, one of the founding directors of the Bitcoin Foundation said he is convinced Dr Wright is who he claims to be.

Funnily enough there is no author assigned to that article.

Where are the consequences for these journalists who continue to write
incorrect misleading information? there doesnt seem to be any.

[hatshepsut93]

Crypto-related journalism has always been garbage, it's basically an arms race of clickbaits between dozens of low-quality sites, the only thing that matters to them is making SHOCKING titles and getting that ad revenue. I'm getting all my crypto news from this forum, because if something remarkable happens, someone will create a thread here.

It's kinda bad that a lot of beginners will get misled by these news, but what can we do? Not everyone visits this forum or social media.

[livingfree]

I really wonder why anyone gives this man any attention at all. It should be known that he is definitely not Satoshi.
The proof would be easy to make, but he can't. So he isn't. This smear theater he's putting on doesn't do justice to the real Satoshi.

He isn't really satoshi and we all knew it.

It's that these media men are giving attention to him. Maybe even if they don't want to give attention to him, there's this paid coverage for them to cover the news.

As if to be "big" on the eyes of the world since they're reporting it.

[sheenshane]

I think that man is an attention seeker and it could be those journalists who were paid by him, isn't it?

I read it here different threads about him and it's claiming that he is the real Satoshi which in fact, he doesn't have any evidence to prove his claim.
Sometimes I'm thinking that he has a mental illness and I wonder he isn't in jail after all.  Probably because claiming to be a Satoshi isn't a fraud either he is Wright or Wrong about his claim which is technically don't have any single proof of legitimacy.

People should aware of this misleading information.

[meanwords]

Here we go again with these news outlets. As many of you have maybe read, Craig Wright won the lawsuit in Miami over a dispute over $50,000,000,000 in bitcoin. This issue is the media is writing misleading headlines suggesting Craig Wright won a lawsuit over whether he was bitcoin's creator or not. They continue to lace their articles with misleading notions suggesting the lawsuit was over whether CW is Satoshi or not.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/06/miami-jury-rules-in-favor-of-craig-wright-bitcoin-claimed-inventor.html

https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/12/24467590/bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-craig-wright-alone-according-to-kleiman-v-wright-jury

Please please please read the entire article before making assumptions. We already have people in the IRC and Reddit already spreading FUD regarding these headlines.

We all know what he has to do to prove he is who he says he is.

These journalist are most likely accomplice of him. This is the reason why I don't really take media seriously nowadays, especially when it comes to these type of topics. Although the media surely does a good job reporting the happenings in the world, bias articles like these are what's really turning me off.

[Hydrogen]

Please please please read the entire article before making assumptions. We already have people in the IRC and Reddit already spreading FUD regarding these headlines.

As far as I know, there have been spammers on forums, social media and chatrooms for many many years. They usually promote ethereum and ripple. Their promotion and spam may coincide with the pump side, of pump and dump cycles for alts. In past years, they enjoyed some success. Many fell for the false hype and contrived marketing campaigns. In recent years, their effectiveness appears to be on a decline. Fewer are buying things like bitcoin cash. If nothing else, it appears to be giving people a life experience which will give them greater odds of success, than in previous years.

The boy who cried wolf only had to be wrong twice to lose his credibility. Saruman the White strained his vocal power of persuasion until it was broken and destroyed. It appears something similar is happening with the people of the world, who no longer blindly believe everything that they read or see on TV.

[pooya87]

he has been ordered to pay $100 million dollars which will bankrupt him many times over

I guess there is a silver lining after all.

I'm not familiar with the legal system, specially the western type but it seems to me that essentially he has been playing the legal system to progress his scams. The media seems to love him too since by creating "attractive" titles they get a ton of traffic which may be considered a win for him lol.