Cøbra announces Bitcoin Core can now be downloaded in the UK

[LFC_Bitcoin]

This block on downloading Bitcoin Core from bitcoin.org in the UK has been in place for a while now due to Craig Wright and his BS suing anything that moves. Any way, due to UK law now rightfully stating that Craig Wright is not Satoshi the block is now removed.

Happy Days.


Cobra
@CobraBitcoin
Bitcoin Core Version 27.0 is now available for download at bitcoin.org/en/download.

The block on UK users downloading it is also now removed. For those that didn't know, it previously wasn't possible to download Bitcoin Core from the UK because of litigation. A good day. 🎉
https://x.com/cobrabitcoin/status/1793711778855284748

[Felicity_Tide]

What a good day 🎉. Faketoshi thinks he could fool us in the first place. Such a great loss for him 

[JeromeTash]

Not that it matter so much but a win is a win 

Am just so sick of faketoshi.

Which begs the question, do this mean that the UK users also have access to the Bitcoin whitepaper via Bitcoin.org?

[achow101]

It's unclear to me why he did not allow downloading Bitcoin Core from bitcoin.org in the UK. The judgement against him only ever talks about the white paper, so making Bitcoin Core not available seems like he did more than was necessary.

Which begs the question, do this mean that the UK users also have access to the Bitcoin whitepaper via Bitcoin.org?

This is more complicated since Cobra wants to remain anonymous. There's basically 2 ways about this: 1) Mellor (the judge in the COPA case) finds some loophole that allows him to rule on the previous judgement, or 2) new litigation is brought against Craig by Cobra and/or "bitcoin.org developers" to reverse the previous judgement.

For the first, it would be really weird though for Mellor to rule on a basically unrelated case that was decided by a different judge. However, maybe there could be some wiggle room with wording related to the fact that some of the developer defendants had contributed to bitcoin.org in the past, and could therefore be part of "the person or persons responsible for the operation and publication of the website bitcoin.org" so he may be able to make a ruling on this.

For the second, Cobra wants to remain anonymous so that seems like it probably wouldn't happen.

[franky1]

to correct achowe(andrew)

the COPA vs CSW case judgeed by mellor said

There is one other claim which has been brought to my attention: the COBRA claim (IL-
2021-000008) in which Dr Wright sued unnamed defendants as ‘The person or persons
responsible for the operation and publication of the website www.bitcoin.org (including
the person or persons using the pseudonym ‘C0BRA’’. The claim was for infringement
of copyright in the Bitcoin White Paper. Dr Wright secured Judgment in default of
acknowledgement of service and defence by the Order of HHJ Hodge QC dated 28 June
2021, which includes an injunction preventing the defendants from infringing copyright
in the Bitcoin White Paper, whether by making the Paper available for download or in
any other way. To the extent necessary, the status of that Order can be considered at the
Form of Order hearing following hand down of this Judgment

meaning a new hearing has to be done.. and no cobra does not need to reveal himself..
much like "government" has representatives(solicitors/lawyers/prosecutors) cobra does not need to personally turn up, he can just send a representative.. much like how gmax(and other devs) didnt need to attend or fight the case in the UK for the COPA vs CSW. instead they hired solicitors to stand in court

when any business is sued, the ceo does not need to attend

[tranthidung]

Anyone who often visits the bitcoin.org website please share your experience.

I could be wrong, but I remember that months ago, when we visit that site, it will have a notification like "Bitcoin Core can not be downloaded in the UK", something like this.

Weeks ago, not today, I visited it and no longer saw that notification.

A note is I don't remember when I visited it a long time ago, and saw that notification, I used Tor or not and whether the IP is from UK.

[franky1]

Anyone who often visits the bitcoin.org website please share your experience.

I could be wrong, but I remember that months ago, when we visit that site, it will have a notification like "Bitcoin Core can not be downloaded in the UK", something like this.

Weeks ago, not today, I visited it and no longer saw that notification.

A note is I don't remember when I visited it a long time ago, and saw that notification, I used Tor or not and whether the IP is from UK.

the c0bra litigation was about the whitepaper.. but to avoid further litigation he probably avoided allowing the software from being downloaded out of fear.. but now its proved CSW is a fraud in UK law. c0bra's fear dissipated and he allowed it..
but the actual c0bra litigation of the whitepaper does require further legal process to get sorted

[achow101]

and no cobra does not need to reveal himself..
much like "government" has representatives(solicitors/lawyers/prosecutors) cobra does not need to personally turn up, he can just send a representative.. much like how gmax(and other devs) didnt need to attend or fight the case in the UK for the COPA vs CSW. instead they hired solicitors to stand in court

when any business is sued, the ceo does not need to attend

There's more to remaining anonymous than simply not needing to show up in court.

In order to hire representation, he probably needs to identify himself to his solicitors. Additionally, my understanding is that, even if sealed by the court, his identity would still be revealed to the court in order for the litigation to proceed. The suit may also involve discovery of documents that will tie his identity to his nym. All of these things could happen that would result in him revealing his identity to someone else, none of which requires actually showing up in person to court.

If it were possible for Cobra to have representation while remaining anonymous, I believe that is what would've happened when the original lawsuit against him was brought. The judgement against him is a default judgement because he refused to defend since doing so would reveal his identity.

[CODE200]

Finally, something is moving in on the British side of bitcoin community, it was only a matter of time and I assume that Cøbra's probably really excited or has been anticipating this for a really long time. Hopefully we can see more people in the UK getting involved in bitcoin, CSW really did a number in UK but now that he's done and all of the lies have been revealed, it's probably going to make more people try to invest in bitcoin, hopefully we see more about the ending of the great fraudster.

[Fiatless]

What a good day 🎉. Faketoshi thinks he could fool us in the first place. Such a great loss for him  

The lair just got his ass whipped by the court. I hope this judgment will end his madness and silence him for life. Maybe his sponsors will look for other means to continue with this clueless litigation. When I read the news that the downloading of Bitcoin white paper have been blocked in the UK due to litigations, I thought it was a calculated effort by the government to attack Bitcoin. But this current judgment is a glimpse that the judiciary is really independent. The judgment is a big win for the Bitcoin community.

If it were possible for Cobra to have representation while remaining anonymous, I believe that is what would've happened when the original lawsuit against him was brought. The judgement against him is a default judgement because he refused to defend since doing so would reveal his identity.

It is against the ethics of the legal profession to represent an anonymous client. If the name Cobra is a group of people or a registered organisation, then it can be represented by a member or one of the directors.

[franky1]

and no cobra does not need to reveal himself..
much like "government" has representatives(solicitors/lawyers/prosecutors) cobra does not need to personally turn up, he can just send a representative.. much like how gmax(and other devs) didnt need to attend or fight the case in the UK for the COPA vs CSW. instead they hired solicitors to stand in court

when any business is sued, the ceo does not need to attend

There's more to remaining anonymous than simply not needing to show up in court.

In order to hire representation, he probably needs to identify himself to his solicitors. Additionally, my understanding is that, even if sealed by the court, his identity would still be revealed to the court in order for the litigation to proceed. The suit may also involve discovery of documents that will tie his identity to his nym. All of these things could happen that would result in him revealing his identity to someone else, none of which requires actually showing up in person to court.

If it were possible for Cobra to have representation while remaining anonymous, I believe that is what would've happened when the original lawsuit against him was brought. The judgement against him is a default judgement because he refused to defend since doing so would reveal his identity.

wrong
it seemed more of a matter that he didnt want to FUND a lawyer but then if representing himself(avoid expenses) would involve revealing himself..
theres a difference

the case against bitcoin.org was not a case against a named person. so cobra could have hired anyone he wants without revealing himself
anyone could have been c0bra
all he has to do is on the website announce his representative for the site is [insert representative] and the courts would see that as valid proof of who represents the site

many websites do this. many brands do it too. courts do not go through whole processes of investigating that stuff
cobra could even say "for all legal enquiries or actions please contact [representative]"
lawyers dont need to meetup and ask for identity of their clients. they form a contract revolving money as the retainer not their clients identity

this is how businesses and governments operate..
after all when government representatives defend the government.. ask the question "WHO IS GOVERNMENT"
give me the single name and birthdate of "government" which government lawyers need to hand to the courts

same goes for trusts, foundations an corporations

..
although CSW named lots of devs in the 'btc core claim'.. guess who turned up to defend it(as official defendants):

Defendants in the BTC Core Claim
JONATHAN HOUGH KC, JONATHAN MOSS (instructed by Bird & Bird LLP)
and TRISTAN SHERLIKER (of Bird & Bird LLP) appeared for COPA.
LORD GRABINER KC, CRAIG ORR KC, MEHDI BAIOU, TIMOTHY
GOLDFARB and RICHARD GREENBERG (instructed by Shoosmiths LLP)
appeared for Dr Wright.
ALEX GUNNING KC and BETH COLLETT (instructed by Macfarlanes LLP)
appeared for the Developers in the BTC Core Claim (Defendants 2-12, 14 & 15).
TERENCE BERGIN KC and JACK CASTLE (instructed by Harcus Parker LLP)
made brief submissions on behalf of the Claimants in the BTC Core Claim

note no devs are named officially

[achow101]

the case against bitcoin.org was not a case against a named person. so cobra could have hired anyone he wants without revealing himself
anyone could have been c0bra
all he has to do is on the website announce his representative for the site is [insert representative] and the courts would see that as valid proof of who represents the site

Sure, but as Fiatless noted, it could be an ethics violation for a lawyer to accept an anonymous client. Even if it weren't, I would expect that you'd have a hard time finding a lawyer who would represent you as an anonymous person without you revealing any information of your identity to them.

many websites do this. many brands do it too. courts do not go through whole processes of investigating that stuff
cobra could even say "for all legal enquiries or actions please contact [representative]"
lawyers dont need to meetup and ask for identity of their clients. they form a contract revolving money as the retainer not their clients identity

Companies are legal entities whose identity is the company itself. For small companies, the lawyers probably do want to know who they are interacting with and whether they actually legally control that company. They may be allowed to not ask for identification, but they may still want to do so anyways.

..
although CSW named lots of devs in the 'btc core claim'.. guess who turned up to defend it(as official defendants):

Defendants in the BTC Core Claim
JONATHAN HOUGH KC, JONATHAN MOSS (instructed by Bird & Bird LLP)
and TRISTAN SHERLIKER (of Bird & Bird LLP) appeared for COPA.
LORD GRABINER KC, CRAIG ORR KC, MEHDI BAIOU, TIMOTHY
GOLDFARB and RICHARD GREENBERG (instructed by Shoosmiths LLP)
appeared for Dr Wright.
ALEX GUNNING KC and BETH COLLETT (instructed by Macfarlanes LLP)
appeared for the Developers in the BTC Core Claim (Defendants 2-12, 14 & 15).
TERENCE BERGIN KC and JACK CASTLE (instructed by Harcus Parker LLP)
made brief submissions on behalf of the Claimants in the BTC Core Claim

note no devs are named officially

That's literally untrue. In the final judgement, the actual claimants and defendants are listed right there as the first thing you see. The lawyers aren't listed as claimants or defendants - that wouldn't make any sense. While there may be other documentation that refers to and discusses the lawyers as "claimants" or "defendants", they aren't the actual claimants or defendants. They represent them, not are them.

[AprilioMP]

Anyone who often visits the bitcoin.org website please share your experience.

I could be wrong, but I remember that months ago, when we visit that site, it will have a notification like "Bitcoin Core can not be downloaded in the UK", something like this.

Weeks ago, not today, I visited it and no longer saw that notification.

A note is I don't remember when I visited it a long time ago, and saw that notification, I used Tor or not and whether the IP is from UK.

I often open the bitcoin.org website and don't feel anything strange when I visit just to read and for other purposes.
But I never noticed that there was a notification saying "Bitcoin Core cannot be downloaded in the UK".
Maybe because I'm in the Indonesian region, there are no problems with the matter in question. CMIIW if I'm wrong about what you mean.

I know about CSW's claim to be the inventor of Bitcoin but I don't really care because I don't like faketoshi.

[OgNasty]

This whole ordeal has been pretty eye opening to me.  I knew that people weaponized the law to try and attack others but I'd never seen such a public example in an area where I had so much firsthand knowledge.  I'm glad that it ended the way it did, but I have to wonder a little bit about the costs those who were targets ended up having to pay.  Sure, they may end up winning more judgements against faketoshi, but the amount of time and opportunity cost lost is basically immeasurable.  Hopefully this leads to less frivolous lawsuits by scammers in the future, but I have my doubts. 

[dkbit98]

Good news.
Maybe Faketoshi and his partners finally run out of money after losing all court cases?

For those that didn't know, it previously wasn't possible to download Bitcoin Core from the UK because of litigation.

I didn't know about that but it sounds weird.
However, for anyone who is using internet it's trivial to change IP address (tor/vpn) and still download Bitcoin Core wallet from any location.
Just saying this in case any other country decides to do something similar in future.

[o_solo_miner]

This block on downloading Bitcoin Core from bitcoin.org in the UK has been in place for a while now due to Craig Wright and his BS suing anything that moves. Any way, due to UK law now rightfully stating that Craig Wright is not Satoshi the block is now removed.
Happy Days.
Cobra
@CobraBitcoin
Bitcoin Core Version 27.0 is now available for download at bitcoin.org/en/download.
The block on UK users downloading it is also now removed. For those that didn't know, it previously wasn't possible to download Bitcoin Core from the UK because of litigation. A good day. 🎉
https://x.com/cobrabitcoin/status/1793711778855284748

This is a message to celebrate!

[darkangel11]

Great news, but also time to think about the situation as a whole.
We live in a strange world where someone can claim this thing belongs to him and the government will block others from using it until the judge decides if it is or is not. It makes me think of that case where a woman can claim she was touched inappropriately and the man gets arrested, fired from work and all that. The world is becoming more and more like a tragicomedy.
IMO Wright should be now counter sued by all the people who experienced problems with accessing their bitcoin due to his lies.

[franky1]

Companies are legal entities whose identity is the company itself. For small companies, the lawyers probably do want to know who they are interacting with and whether they actually legally control that company. They may be allowed to not ask for identification, but they may still want to do so anyways.

congratulations you are starting to get it

While there may be other documentation that refers to and discusses the lawyers as "claimants" or "defendants", they aren't the actual claimants or defendants. They represent them, not are them.

congratulations, you are starting to see the point
your forum bro gmax did not need to attend uk court nor need to hand over birth certification to the court, he used representatives

[franky1]

That's literally untrue. In the final judgement, the actual claimants and defendants are listed right there as the first thing you see.

thats the reference of the names CSW himself wrote as to who he filed a case against...
however
the court then wrote who the COURT seen as the defendants of that case being:

Defendants in the BTC Core Claim
JONATHAN HOUGH KC, JONATHAN MOSS (instructed by Bird & Bird LLP)
and TRISTAN SHERLIKER (of Bird & Bird LLP) appeared for COPA.
LORD GRABINER KC, CRAIG ORR KC, MEHDI BAIOU, TIMOTHY
GOLDFARB and RICHARD GREENBERG (instructed by Shoosmiths LLP)
appeared for Dr Wright.
ALEX GUNNING KC and BETH COLLETT (instructed by Macfarlanes LLP)
appeared for the Developers in the BTC Core Claim (Defendants 2-12, 14 & 15).
TERENCE BERGIN KC and JACK CASTLE (instructed by Harcus Parker LLP)
made brief submissions on behalf of the Claimants in the BTC Core Claim

because thats who responded as representatives

EG "appeared for COPA"
copa is not a real person with a birth certificate, its a, as you call it a nym
"on behalf of btc core"
btc core is not a real person with a birth certificate

even the judge only wanted to interact with the representatives

This judgment was handed down remotely by circulation to the parties’ representatives by email

thus in civil cases the judge does not care about birth certificated proof that the defendant is the actual human being sued/ordered/accused

its only in criminal cases where the accused is suppose to attend

i know you are confused about identity right now andrew, but try not to rely on tiktok trends as your advisors of your chosen identity. as that will make you confused.

[btc78]

What a good day 🎉. Faketoshi thinks he could fool us in the first place. Such a great loss for him 

He did not lose anything in terms of in bitcoin as he did not have anything to begin with. If anything he just made himself lose more. He’s lost both money and reputation which two of the very powerful things you can have in life.

I’m sure UK citizens who are into bitcoin are celebrating but I am also sure that this can make way for more people to discover bitcoin and get interested. I know this wouldn’t be the last time someone would claim to be satoshi but I hope they don’t fool a lot of people