UK Judge Rejects Scientist's Claim to Be Bitcoin Inventor
UK Court Denies Wright's Claim as Bitcoin Creator: Fair?
A UK judge at London’s High Court ruled that Australian computer scientist Craig Wright falsely claimed to be the inventor of bitcoin, identifying himself as "Satoshi Nakamoto." The judge found that Wright had lied and forged documents to support his claim. This ruling came as a result of a lawsuit by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance aimed at preventing Wright from suing bitcoin developers. Wright announced plans to appeal the decision.
How did COPA react to the High Court's ruling in their blog post?
In their blog post following the High Court's ruling, the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) expressed a strong positive reaction. They described the judgment as one that "forensically demolishes Wright’s fraudulent claims." COPA highlighted the significance of the decision for the open-source community, calling it a "watershed moment" and a "definitive win for the truth." They emphasized that the ruling allows developers to continue their work on the bitcoin network without the fear of litigation or threats to their personal livelihoods, as posed by Craig Wright's actions1.
What specific reasons did Judge James Mellor provide for concluding that Craig Wright was not the pseudonymous "Satoshi Nakamoto"?
Judge James Mellor provided several specific reasons for concluding that Craig Wright was not the pseudonymous "Satoshi Nakamoto":
-
Lies and Forged Documents: The judge stated that Wright had lied and forged documents to support his claim to be the inventor of Bitcoin. These forgeries were identified and analyzed by forensic document analysis experts.
-
Inconsistencies in Wright's Claims: The judge pointed out inconsistencies in Wright's claims about his role in the creation of Bitcoin. These inconsistencies were highlighted during the trial, where Wright's explanations were found to be unconvincing.
-
Wright's Lawsuits and Views on Bitcoin: The judge noted that Wright's lawsuits against developers and his views about Bitcoin contradicted his claims to be the inventor. These lawsuits were seen as attempts to intimidate developers and stifle the open-source community.
-
Lack of Conclusive Evidence: Despite Wright's claims and his attempts to provide evidence, the judge found that the overall evidence did not support Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto. The evidence presented was deemed overwhelming that Wright was not the author of the Bitcoin white paper, not the person who operated under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, not the creator of the Bitcoin system, and not the author of the initial versions of the Bitcoin software.
These reasons, among others, led Judge Mellor to conclude that Craig Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto was false.