4 ms·

Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules

91 points by colejohnson66 2y ago

hortonangela901 2y ago
[dead]
normanlawrence 2y ago
[flagged]
gibneylinda66 2y ago
[flagged]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
skilled 2y ago
Who is this guy and why is he chasing this kind of clout? It didn’t occur to him that he could prove he is Satoshi in other ways? Is this one of those throw mud (lawsuits) at a wall and see what sticks type of guys?
- sanex 2y ago
  He's been trying to claim he's Satoshi for like 10 years and trying to sue people using the open source code as copyright infringement? Also wants to get everyone on his shit coin. He thinks he's smarter than everyone else but clearly not.
- exabrial 2y ago
  FTA: > A judge in the UK High Court has ruled that computer scientist Craig Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly,” and committed forgery “on a grand scale” in aid of a years-long quest to prove he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin. Theres some other lawsuits surrounding him that are fascinating: people trying to seize some Bitcoin via injecting rules into the codebase, equity owed from early mining, etc. Start at the wikipedia page!
- Nextgrid 2y ago
  He conned a billionaire idiot to bankroll his lawsuits under the idea that should they succeed he'll be able to gain control of the Satoshi coins and presumably give the money back + more. I guess after having spent so much money he's so deep in his lies that his only way was to keep going even as the lies started falling apart (his latest round of fabricated evidence was very sloppy, so I assume he couldn't do a better job because he was running out of time/money).
  - gweinberg 2y ago
    Doesn't make a lot of sense though, does it? Even if he could convince the judge he was Satoshi, indeed even if he in fact was Satoshi, if he didn't have the keys, he would not be able to spend the coins. Conversely, even if he had no clue who the reals Satoshi was, if he somehow acquired the keys, he would have the coins.
    - throwaway6272 2y ago
      Wright’s rebrand of the Bitcoin codebase named Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision includes support for a central authority to receive a court order or “document of equivalent force” in order to freeze or seize any output. BSV is essentially worthless however ($66) and very thinly traded, so making any claim to coins you do or do not own is rather irrelevant in the scheme of things.
    - Nextgrid 2y ago
      Once he manages to set a legal precedent that he is Satoshi, he could leverage that in his other lawsuits against Bitcoin Core devs to force them to release an update that effectively gives him control of the coins, similar to how the Ethereum community rolled back "The DAO" hack.
      - lostmsu 2y ago
        I don't see how that would be possible considering Bitcoin Core was always open source.
- PhasmaFelis 2y ago
  > It didn’t occur to him that he could prove he is Satoshi in other ways? To be fair, he's limited by not actually being Satoshi.
  - olliej 2y ago
    :D
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mike_hearn 2y ago
I took part in this trial as a witness (Judge Mellor discusses my testimony in the penultimate section). There are many remarkable things about this case. The judgement is very clearly written and keeps legalese to a minimum. Anyone could read this and understand the case perfectly well. The simplicity of the final judgement helps (Wright is a pathological liar), but still, it's well written and has some amusing sections. The British IP courts clearly have access to some very technical judges. Mellor says he was docketed this case due to concern it'd have a lot of technical claims due to being about Bitcoin, but in the end all the technical knowledge required was about Wright's forgeries. Having read parts of the judgement, it's clear that Mellor is fluent in all the knowledge required and wasn't fooled for an instant, even though Wright was constantly babbling about symlinks, Citrix, XCOPY and many other obscure technical topics. Mellor also included a (largely superfluous in the end) explanation of how Bitcoin works that's accurate and clear. My confidence in the abilities of the courts to try such cases has definitely improving having seen this one, though how well this expertise is replicated in criminal cases is unclear. The skill of the COPA lawyers and with Patrick Madden's ability to detect forgeries was also outstanding. Some of it was very Sherlock Holmes. At one point Wright presented hand-written notes he claimed were from the design phase of Bitcoin (i.e. pre-2009). Madden wrote to the company that manufactured the notepad and learned that specific type of pad post-dated Bitcoin's launch, thus proving the notes were a forgery. In other cases he wrote to the designers of fonts that Wright had used to prove documents had been backdated. There were hundreds of documents with problems like this and Madden/COPA managed to plough through them all. Wright's side were very well funded. He hired top class lawyers, and even a former judge and a professional prosecutor to run a mock trial for him before the real one. He lost his own mock trial, with the pseudo-judge convinced he wasn't Satoshi, but this somehow didn't stop them proceeding. It's a good reminder that despite the common stereotype, the best funded side doesn't automatically win in legal proceedings.
- School-Cotton 2y ago
  For those who, like me, had trouble finding the actual judgment, here it is: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/copa-v-wright/ https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/copa-v-wright/
- 2y ago
PhasmaFelis 2y ago
> A few days later, Wright killed another lawsuit in which his company, Tulip Trading, accused Bitcoin developers of violating their fiduciary duties by refusing to help the firm recover a large amount of bitcoin allegedly lost in a hack. Holy shit, he actually named a crypto company after tulips? Isn't that a little bit on-the-nose?
- ImAnAmateur 2y ago
  I wouldn't have realized if you hadn't said anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania
- justinclift 2y ago
  Kind of like a government contractor naming itself "Boondoggle Industries". Which would be funny, if someone's looking for company name suggestions. ;)
- bitnorbert 2y ago
  As far as I remember, it was the name of a matured shelf company he purchased as part of falsifying his history. The provider had a range of companies to choose from, so he picked one with the most bitcoin-related name, which turned out to be Tulip Trading.
  - PhasmaFelis 2y ago
    Wow.
zaphod420 2y ago
The only proof that anyone will ever accept is a message signed by a private key that is publicly known to be owned by satoshi. Even then, some will be skeptical since keys can be stolen.
RyanAdamas 2y ago
So glad to see this guy finally outed as a complete fraud. Can't believe he was able to get as far as he did with it all being bullshit. A true testament to the power of abject lying. Edit: Though now that I say this, considering the extent of Wrights fraud, lies and likely debts to get this far there is a very high likelihood of suicide.
- tim333 2y ago
  I think most people thought he was a fraud before the trial. This should stop him sueing people in bitcoin though. I doubt it'll stop him going on about being Satoshi.
  - tim333 2y ago
    Update: >Craig Wright Vows to Appeal Damning “Not Satoshi” Verdict. Undeterred by a written verdict exposing his forged evidence, Craig Wright doubles down on debunked Satoshi claims, vows to appeal. https://dailycoin.com/craig-wright-vows-to-appeal-damning-not-satoshi-verdict/ https://dailycoin.com/craig-wright-vows-to-appeal-damning-no...
olalonde 2y ago
Greg Maxwell's summary of the judgement on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/1cwbsb9/mellors_main_judgment_is_out/ https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/1cwbsb9/mellors_main_j...
shellycharls9 2y ago
[flagged]
- singleshot_ 2y ago
  Adrian Lamo, in case it is not obvious from this post, has died.
banish-m4 2y ago
Like Dan "D.B." Cooper or Navy SEALs, there are no net economic or personal safety advantages for the real Satoshi to please stand up but there are plenty of motives for imposters to make claims.

91 points by colejohnson66 2y ago

hortonangela901 2y ago

[dead]

normanlawrence 2y ago

[flagged]

gibneylinda66 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

skilled 2y ago

Who is this guy and why is he chasing this kind of clout? It didn’t occur to him that he could prove he is Satoshi in other ways? Is this one of those throw mud (lawsuits) at a wall and see what sticks type of guys?

sanex 2y ago
He's been trying to claim he's Satoshi for like 10 years and trying to sue people using the open source code as copyright infringement? Also wants to get everyone on his shit coin. He thinks he's smarter than everyone else but clearly not.
exabrial 2y ago
FTA: > A judge in the UK High Court has ruled that computer scientist Craig Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly,” and committed forgery “on a grand scale” in aid of a years-long quest to prove he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin. Theres some other lawsuits surrounding him that are fascinating: people trying to seize some Bitcoin via injecting rules into the codebase, equity owed from early mining, etc. Start at the wikipedia page!
Nextgrid 2y ago
He conned a billionaire idiot to bankroll his lawsuits under the idea that should they succeed he'll be able to gain control of the Satoshi coins and presumably give the money back + more. I guess after having spent so much money he's so deep in his lies that his only way was to keep going even as the lies started falling apart (his latest round of fabricated evidence was very sloppy, so I assume he couldn't do a better job because he was running out of time/money).
- gweinberg 2y ago
  Doesn't make a lot of sense though, does it? Even if he could convince the judge he was Satoshi, indeed even if he in fact was Satoshi, if he didn't have the keys, he would not be able to spend the coins. Conversely, even if he had no clue who the reals Satoshi was, if he somehow acquired the keys, he would have the coins.
  - throwaway6272 2y ago
    Wright’s rebrand of the Bitcoin codebase named Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision includes support for a central authority to receive a court order or “document of equivalent force” in order to freeze or seize any output. BSV is essentially worthless however ($66) and very thinly traded, so making any claim to coins you do or do not own is rather irrelevant in the scheme of things.
  - Nextgrid 2y ago
    Once he manages to set a legal precedent that he is Satoshi, he could leverage that in his other lawsuits against Bitcoin Core devs to force them to release an update that effectively gives him control of the coins, similar to how the Ethereum community rolled back "The DAO" hack.
    - lostmsu 2y ago
      I don't see how that would be possible considering Bitcoin Core was always open source.
PhasmaFelis 2y ago
> It didn’t occur to him that he could prove he is Satoshi in other ways? To be fair, he's limited by not actually being Satoshi.
- olliej 2y ago
  :D

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

mike_hearn 2y ago

I took part in this trial as a witness (Judge Mellor discusses my testimony in the penultimate section). There are many remarkable things about this case. The judgement is very clearly written and keeps legalese to a minimum. Anyone could read this and understand the case perfectly well. The simplicity of the final judgement helps (Wright is a pathological liar), but still, it's well written and has some amusing sections. The British IP courts clearly have access to some very technical judges. Mellor says he was docketed this case due to concern it'd have a lot of technical claims due to being about Bitcoin, but in the end all the technical knowledge required was about Wright's forgeries. Having read parts of the judgement, it's clear that Mellor is fluent in all the knowledge required and wasn't fooled for an instant, even though Wright was constantly babbling about symlinks, Citrix, XCOPY and many other obscure technical topics. Mellor also included a (largely superfluous in the end) explanation of how Bitcoin works that's accurate and clear. My confidence in the abilities of the courts to try such cases has definitely improving having seen this one, though how well this expertise is replicated in criminal cases is unclear. The skill of the COPA lawyers and with Patrick Madden's ability to detect forgeries was also outstanding. Some of it was very Sherlock Holmes. At one point Wright presented hand-written notes he claimed were from the design phase of Bitcoin (i.e. pre-2009). Madden wrote to the company that manufactured the notepad and learned that specific type of pad post-dated Bitcoin's launch, thus proving the notes were a forgery. In other cases he wrote to the designers of fonts that Wright had used to prove documents had been backdated. There were hundreds of documents with problems like this and Madden/COPA managed to plough through them all. Wright's side were very well funded. He hired top class lawyers, and even a former judge and a professional prosecutor to run a mock trial for him before the real one. He lost his own mock trial, with the pseudo-judge convinced he wasn't Satoshi, but this somehow didn't stop them proceeding. It's a good reminder that despite the common stereotype, the best funded side doesn't automatically win in legal proceedings.

School-Cotton 2y ago
For those who, like me, had trouble finding the actual judgment, here it is: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/copa-v-wright/ https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/copa-v-wright/
2y ago

PhasmaFelis 2y ago

> A few days later, Wright killed another lawsuit in which his company, Tulip Trading, accused Bitcoin developers of violating their fiduciary duties by refusing to help the firm recover a large amount of bitcoin allegedly lost in a hack. Holy shit, he actually named a crypto company after tulips? Isn't that a little bit on-the-nose?

ImAnAmateur 2y ago
I wouldn't have realized if you hadn't said anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania
justinclift 2y ago
Kind of like a government contractor naming itself "Boondoggle Industries". Which would be funny, if someone's looking for company name suggestions. ;)
bitnorbert 2y ago
As far as I remember, it was the name of a matured shelf company he purchased as part of falsifying his history. The provider had a range of companies to choose from, so he picked one with the most bitcoin-related name, which turned out to be Tulip Trading.
- PhasmaFelis 2y ago
  Wow.

zaphod420 2y ago

The only proof that anyone will ever accept is a message signed by a private key that is publicly known to be owned by satoshi. Even then, some will be skeptical since keys can be stolen.

RyanAdamas 2y ago

So glad to see this guy finally outed as a complete fraud. Can't believe he was able to get as far as he did with it all being bullshit. A true testament to the power of abject lying. Edit: Though now that I say this, considering the extent of Wrights fraud, lies and likely debts to get this far there is a very high likelihood of suicide.

tim333 2y ago
I think most people thought he was a fraud before the trial. This should stop him sueing people in bitcoin though. I doubt it'll stop him going on about being Satoshi.
- tim333 2y ago
  Update: >Craig Wright Vows to Appeal Damning “Not Satoshi” Verdict. Undeterred by a written verdict exposing his forged evidence, Craig Wright doubles down on debunked Satoshi claims, vows to appeal. https://dailycoin.com/craig-wright-vows-to-appeal-damning-not-satoshi-verdict/ https://dailycoin.com/craig-wright-vows-to-appeal-damning-no...

olalonde 2y ago

Greg Maxwell's summary of the judgement on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/1cwbsb9/mellors_main_judgment_is_out/ https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/1cwbsb9/mellors_main_j...

shellycharls9 2y ago

[flagged]

singleshot_ 2y ago
Adrian Lamo, in case it is not obvious from this post, has died.

banish-m4 2y ago

Like Dan "D.B." Cooper or Navy SEALs, there are no net economic or personal safety advantages for the real Satoshi to please stand up but there are plenty of motives for imposters to make claims.