COPA just won its first hearing against Craig

[franky1]

'A man who claims to be the secret inventor of Bitcoin has failed in a legal bid to throw out a High Court lawsuit saying he's talking tosh – and will be accused of forging proof he is Satoshi Nakamoto.'

A summary for those, who are new here.

When exactly do they plan to end this case, because they have been dragging it for a long time now?

when CSW is the claimant, his style is that of SLAPP. where by he takes his time making nonsense case updates asking for silly alterations or exemptions to delay things. challenging the wording of the other sides responses. and other silly things

this tactic is usually to force the other party to seek legal advice at each challenge and start costing the other side considerable amounts of money just trying to answer/respond to these silly queries. SLAPP is never about rushing things to trial to get a final verdict. its about delaying(challenging responses) to the case with silly requests to cost the other side money, hoping that the other side gives up and just pays the SLAPPER to go away.

even in the latest case where CSW is now the defendant. he is still doing silly case note challenges trying to suppress evidence even before the proper time of requesting evidence to be suppressed (usually in the trial, during discovery is the appropriate time)

[1715152545]

1715152545

[1715152545]

1715152545

[1715152545]

1715152545

[1715152545]

1715152545

[1715152545]

1715152545

[DooMAD]

where by he takes his time making nonsense case updates asking for silly alterations or exemptions to delay things. challenging the wording of the other sides responses. and other silly things

And I can personally attest that franky1 is the forum's foremost expert on utilising that tactic.  He knows what he's talking about.  Faketoshi would be proud.

When exactly do they plan to end this case, because they have been dragging it for a long time now?

It's not just one case.  That's the problem.  There will continue to be fresh cases until Faketoshi runs out of money or ends up behind bars.  Sadly, this isn't going to end any time soon.

[leea-1334]

Honestly,,, why not just let this stupid guy win and let him go on and make a fool of himself? He is dragging everything through the mud? I know it seems really bad to let the truth slide and allow him to fool others but I always feel like if people are willing to be convinced by him even after going through EVERY single episode of his life and not coming to the conclusion that he is a trickster,,, I mean it seems pretty clear to me he is in the wrong and yet he is still not in jail for fraud?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Honestly,,, why not just let this stupid guy win and let him go on and make a fool of himself?

The current case is CSW demanding that the Core developers fork bitcoin by implementing code to the protocol which would allow CSW to access over 100,000 bitcoin that he does not and has never owned. Although any such fork would obviously be ignored by 99.99% of the community, ultimately making the whole process meaningless since CSW would claim 100,000 bitcoin on the forked chain which would be worth nothing, it's not exactly a precedent we want to set - that courts or individuals can overrule the developers and legislate on how bitcoin should be developed.

If people want to follow this known fraud and get his shitcoin dumped on them, then go right ahead, but we should not be rolling over and letting him interfere with the real bitcoin.


In another update to the proceedings, this just came through on the bitcoin-dev mailing list: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-January/019741.html

So Jack Dorsey is starting an organization to provide funding for the legal defense of the developers, starting with this current case. I'm not sure how that fits with the ruling I posted above that CSW will have to pay a deposit up front to cover their legal costs, but it's a welcome development nonetheless.

[mynonce]

Jack Dorsey announces Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund

... starting with this current case.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/jack-dorsey-announces-bitcoin-legal-defense-fund
https://cryptonews.com/news/jack-dorsey-co-launch-bitcoin-legal-defense-fund-prepare-wage-legal-war-with-craig-wright.htm
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2022/01/12/dorsey-proposes-non-profit-bitcoin-legal-defense-fund-for-developers/
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/dorsey-proposes-non-profit-bitcoin-062710476.html

[aysg76]

He is top fraudster among all of them and end up with all his net worth also being consumed in these legal hearings but what he is expecting will never happen because he is not the owner of those million coins and we all know the fact.

The same thing is biggest proof is the keys to prove the ownership and he can't even sign a message from that address and still believes that we would believe him? The clown has few audience like him but won't be entertaining them long so it's best to watch what stupidity he comes up with next.There was one such thread in which i mentioned about faketoshi CSW through a meme to the community and here it is :

Made me laugh hard



To all the faketoshis in the market this technique is worth trying but still it won't help you.

Have a look at full thread here : Faketoshi

We all need to help COPA in matching up the legal expenses to expose this fraudster to the whole public and tell that he can't manipulate the court of law even with money power because the Bitcoin doesn't care at all and that's why decentralisation has taken place.Let him try his best but in the end he is working to prove himself the real clown.

[mynonce]

In another update to the proceedings, this just came through on the bitcoin-dev mailing list: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-January/019741.html

Just posted for bitcointalk folks, if they want to ask that question:

@esiattorney
Where can more volunteer and part-time lawyers sign up?

@UltraRat3
Same question.  Happy to assist.

@jack answered: (source: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1481242677236707329)
Email address at end of note is best place to start

(info at bitcoindefensefund.org)

[franky1]

where by he takes his time making nonsense case updates asking for silly alterations or exemptions to delay things. challenging the wording of the other sides responses. and other silly things

And I can personally attest that franky1 is the forum's foremost expert on utilising that tactic.  He knows what he's talking about.  Faketoshi would be proud.

boring poke. bear didnt bite. it just yawned. not even the kardashians would be proud of your social drama attempts.
you are just not that important for people to care about your personal thoughts outside your friend group.
..
funnily enough DooMAD has actually attempted this trick multiple times first, which intrigued me to learn more about tactics of people like DooMAD and faketoshi.. funnier part is that DooMAD and faketoshi dont like it when their tactics are reversed on them..

.. may the bitcoin defence fund continue to annoy faketoshi, even use faketoshi's tactics against him. or just out his tactics publicly for all to see.
such as getting him to admit that the 2016 'signature reveal' was actually a publicly available 2009 signature unrelated to messages faketoshi made (yep he finally admitted it in court records)

[leea-1334]

So Jack Dorsey is starting an organization to provide funding for the legal defense of the developers, starting with this current case. I'm not sure how that fits with the ruling I posted above that CSW will have to pay a deposit up front to cover their legal costs, but it's a welcome development nonetheless.

Thank you for the explanation,,, I must admit when I read it I did not realize it was this serious. You are right that even if he has access it is meaningless but it is the principle of giving in to one mad man, then any numbers of madmen can do this in the future.

Was there not a fund also set up for Cobra previously,,, did that money get put to use? I would happily contribute a week signature earning to such a cause. We are little people but we know what is right.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Was there not a fund also set up for Cobra previously,,, did that money get put to use?

There was a thread created by LFC_Bitcoin here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5332996.0) appealing for donations, but I do not believe there was formal fund set up. Although it seems Cøbra did seek out legal advice, he never actually went to court since by doing so he would have to reveal his real identity, and it was clear that whole court case was just a ploy by CSW to try to obtain that information and use it to attack and hurt Cøbra. I'm therefore not sure what legal fees, if any, he sustained.

This current case is different since the developers have been named and will likely have significant expenses in defending themselves from these sham accusations.

I would happily contribute a week signature earning to such a cause. We are little people but we know what is right.

Great attitude to have! The email from Dorsey says they are not looking for donations at the moment. A quick web search puts Dorsey's net worth at somewhere between $8 and $15 billion, depending on the source, so if he is bank rolling this himself then he should have things covered for a while.

[Mbitr]

CSW has to pay £70,000 to COPA in legal costs by February 22nd

Anyone got any more information or any links to the actual hearing where this was awarded?
(Can’t find it at the mo )

https://coingeek.com/judge-calls-copa-claimed-legal-costs-excessive-reduces-award-by-33/

[o_e_l_e_o]

Here you go: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/242.html

It's not as clear cut as that, though: COPA were claiming for £120,000, while the judge awarded them £70,000, due mainly to discrepancies in the number of hours they claim have been spent on the case by various lawyers.

[Mbitr]

Here you go: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/242.html

It's not as clear cut as that, though: COPA were claiming for £120,000, while the judge awarded them £70,000, due mainly to discrepancies in the number of hours they claim have been spent on the case by various lawyers.

Thanks for that 
An interesting read actually - nothing about the case as such - more about the fact that the Lawyers/Solicitors are making a fortune out of the case - no change there 
Judge seemed thoroughly fed up 

[odolvlobo]

Another update in the case is viewable here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BLkVxG1wtvzEQeByFGUFYfzWTkvihqie/

The TL;DR is that devs have won a ruling which states that CSW must pay a security deposit to cover their legal costs up front, since the judge ruled she has "reason to believe" that CSW "will be unable to pay the defendants’ costs if ordered to do so."

That is a separate and unrelated case.

There are currently several cases involving CSW:

1. COPA is suing CSW, forcing him to prove his claims of being Satoshi.
2. CSW is suing various people for defamation.
3. CSW is suing developers, forcing them to modify code to allow transfer of BTC, BCH, and BSV to him without having the private keys.

This topic is about #1. Other cases should be moved to other topics.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Judge seemed thoroughly fed up  

Completely. Although I can't help but feel he's missed the point on something:

Both sides are behaving in an ultra-aggressive and unco-operative way towards each other, which is certainly not conducive to the efficient conduct of the litigation.

He seems to think that CSW actually has an interest in the litigation being conductive effectively, and not just drawing things out for as long as possible to both cost the other side as much money as possible and prop up his scam coin for as long as possible. CSW is deliberately making things as inefficient as possible.

This line was also particularly interesting:

I simply do not understand why in 2022 professional, trained lawyers, who should know how to stand up to their clients, and concentrate instead on what is important in the litigation, think it is appropriate to behave like schoolchildren in the playground.

I read this as a direct dig at Ontier for not telling CSW how frivolous and stupid some of this satellite litigation is.

That is a separate and unrelated case.

Sure, but it's still litigation involving CSW. One thread about this identity thief in Bitcoin Discussion is more than enough.

[mynonce]

Bitcoin Developers Do Not Have a Fiduciary Duty to Bitcoin Owners, Judge Rules
https://blockworks.co/bitcoin-developers-do-not-have-a-fiduciary-duty-to-bitcoin-owners-judge-rules/

London High Court rejects a claim that developers must help access bitcoins from allegedly lost private keys.

[aoluain]

Its obvious from the article that

a.) Judge Sarah Falk of the London High Court was well versed in Bitcoin, its development
and operations

and

b.) Judge Falk can see through the very thin cloak over CSW's lies and trickery

“It is very hard to see how TTL’s case on fiduciary duty is seriously arguable,”

...Such a claim, she wrote, was not “realistically arguable.”

I love to see this language being used by someone in authority, this ruling is
another thread unraveling from CSW's web of lies, soon there will be nothing left
to support him.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Here is a link to the ruling: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/667.html

Some very interesting/amusing quotes:

It is uncontroversial that a fundamental feature of the Networks, at least in their existing form, is that digital assets are transferred through the use of private keys. TTL effectively seeks to bypass that. There must be a real risk that acceding to TTL's demands would not be consistent with a duty of single-minded loyalty owed to other users.

The fact that the BSV Network may be preparing to make a system change to accommodate loss of access to private keys (see [22] above) does not mean that any such change, whether a general one or specific to TTL, can be imposed on others.

Judge openly stating that Wright is seeking to destroy bitcoin for his own ego, just like he is about to destroy what little is left of BSV. What a joke.

TTL also claims that the Defendants are in breach of a duty of care by failing to include in the software means to allow those who have lost their private keys or had them stolen to access their bitcoin, failing to include sufficient safeguards against wrongdoing by third parties, and failing to take steps to give TTL access and/or control or otherwise protect TTL against fraud or allow it to seek to put right any fraud that occurs in the future.

That certainly sounds like something Satoshi would say, doesn't it? I'm taking you to court because the software I myself wrote about a decentralized currency doesn't include some centralized mechanism to hand out other people's coins.  

A further point to keep in mind in this case is that any loss suffered by TTL is properly characterised as purely economic. (TTL made written submissions to the contrary but Mr Wardell rightly did not pursue them orally.)

Sounds like CSW is firing off absolute bullshit in his statements despite best advice from his legal team, who are then forced to try to defend his absolute bullshit (or completely ignore it, as in this case). Pretty sure the lawyers know they won't win this, but the money is too good to pass on.

[larry_vw_1955]

craig wright just keep making the news for all the wrong reasons...

[o_e_l_e_o]

Not about COPA, but known scammer CSW doesn't deserve another thread about him, so I'll just add this in here.

Here is the ruling for the case between Peter McCormack and CSW: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Wright-v-McCormack-Judgment.pdf
The case is CSW suing McCormarck for libel after McCormack repeatedly tweeted that CSW is not Satoshi. (Because we all know that suing people who say things you don't like is exactly the kind of thing we would expect the real Satoshi to do ).

Turns out CSW lies. Like, a lot.

In any event, there is no doubt at all about what Dr Wright was saying in para. 41 of his first witness statement – and he now accepts that this was incorrect.

Dr Wright now accepts that his evidence (though not his pleading) was wrong, but says that this was inadvertent.

It is striking that, with the assistance of his very well-resourced lawyers, he has been unable to locate any documentary evidence to support his account that invitations were made and then rescinded

There was no documentary evidence of this. In any event, it is not what he had said in his Re-Amended Particulars of Claim or evidence and, if true, is contrary to the case originally advanced

Dr Nguyen’s evidence strongly suggests the falsity of Dr Wright’s new case that he had received an informal invitation from her.

Again, however, this is flatly inconsistent with his original case.

I'll stop quoting at that point because it goes on and on for several more pages documenting all his lies. The judge summarizes with these two paragraphs though:

I therefore conclude that Dr Wright’s original case on serious harm, and the evidence supporting it, both of which were maintained until days before trial, were deliberately false.

Had it not been for Dr Wright’s deliberately false case as to serious harm, a more than minimal award of damages would have been appropriate, though the quantum would have been reduced to reflect the fact that Mr McCormack was goaded into making the statements he did and, having found Dr Wright not to be a witness of truth, I would have rejected in its entirety his case as to the distress he claims to have suffered.

So another waste of everybody's time and money to reach the conclusion that we've all known for years: CSW is full of shit.