As an analyst with years of experience in the cryptocurrency market, I must say that Craig Wright’s latest legal maneuvers leave me scratching my head more than ever. His persistent claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto, despite mounting evidence to the contrary and multiple court rulings against him, have turned into a recurring joke within the industry.
Craig Wright, an Australian tech expert who maintains he’s Satoshi Nakamoto, the mysterious inventor of Bitcoin (BTC), has again taken legal action. In this instance, he’s suing the team behind Bitcoin Core, with Square Up Europe Limited – a branch of Jack Dorsey’s Block company – being among the named defendants.
Earlier this week, a court case was initiated in the Chancery Division of London’s High Court, alleging that the defendants have modified Bitcoin’s fundamental characteristics by executing the Taproot update and Segregated Witness (SegWit). Wright claims these alterations stray from the original concept of Bitcoin.
Allegations of Misrepresentation
As an analyst, I’ve observed that the alterations made to the Bitcoin blockchain, as asserted by the self-proclaimed Satoshi Nakamoto, have stirred up confusion within the market. These changes, according to this individual, have led the public to mistakenly believe that Bitcoin still possesses its original characteristics. Wright further argued that these modifications undermine the very foundation of what Satoshi Nakamoto initially conceived and executed.
In response, an Australian computer programmer is trying to find out the gap in market worth between Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision (BSV), the digital asset he believes is the genuine evolution of the original Bitcoin system. As of October 10th, BTC was being traded at approximately $62,000 (around £48,000), while BSV was priced at around $65 (about £50). This price difference has prompted Wright to file a claim for around $1.18 billion (approximately £911 million) in potential damages.
Previous Legal Challenges
Wright is no stranger to litigation. In a previous lawsuit against Bitcoin.Org’s “Cøbra” he claimed copyright infringement of the Bitcoin whitepaper Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, which he says he authored.
Nevertheless, the Australian entrepreneur forfeited the case as Lord Justice Arnold determined that Wright’s evidence was significantly lacking in substantiating his assertion of being the initial inventor of Bitcoin. The court ultimately decided that Wright held no valid title to the document and failed to provide sufficient proof that he was Satoshi Nakamoto.
In spite of this obstacle, Wright persisted in launching lawsuits asserting his role as the inventor of the Bitcoin blockchain. This ongoing legal dispute eventually resulted in a court order prohibiting him from filing further cases concerning the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto.
Despite the court’s ruling, he has returned to court to make his case that Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision (BSV) is the authentic interpretation of the original cryptocurrency conceptualized by Satoshi Nakamoto.
Defamation Case and Further Controversy
An instance where Wright’s inability to substantiate his Satoshi Nakamoto claim was evident occurred in 2022 amidst a legal battle with Magnus Granath, a well-known proponent of Bitcoin who goes by the online moniker “Hodlonaut.
In 2019, Granath publicly labeled Wright as a “scammer” on Twitter, leading to a lawsuit by Wright. However, a Norwegian court decided that Granath’s remarks were not defamatory because they were considered reasonable within the context of Wright’s prior public statements.
In its ruling, the court stated:
In this context, “fraud” means someone who pretends to be something they’re not, while “fake” signifies something illegitimate or untrue. A “scammer,” therefore, can be interpreted as a person who deceives others by making false promises or schemes.
In the course of this matter, Wright was requested to verify himself as Satoshi Nakamoto by signing a message utilizing the private key linked to Bitcoin’s original block. Similar to past efforts to substantiate his claim, Wright failed to comply, later disclosing that he had discarded the hard drive holding the password to the digital wallet.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-10-18 21:00