A judge recently published his ruling in the COPA case against Craig Wright, as reported by the New York Times: Craig is not Satoshi Nakamoto. According to the New York Times, this is a major victory for Bitcoin.
Sure, here is the translation while keeping the HTML markup and not translating the words “bull” and “bear”: “`htmlLet’s see all the details below.
“`Summary
Great victory for Bitcoin, according to the New York Times: Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto
As anticipated, the long legal drama between the Cryptocurrency Open Patent Alliance (COPA) and Dr. Craig Steven Wright has concluded with a final court ruling.
Dr. Wright, who has notoriously claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the enigmatic creator of Bitcoin, was found to have committed a deliberate deception to support his claim.
Ponendo così fine a una delle rivendicazioni di identità più sensazionali nella storia della tecnologia con un clamoroso rifiuto giudiziario.
Il caso contro il Dr. Wright ruotava attorno alla sua audace affermazione di essere la persona dietro lo pseudonimo di Satoshi Nakamoto. Il quale nel 2008 ha introdotto Bitcoin al mondo con la pubblicazione del white paper e il rilascio del codice sorgente originale.
COPA, which represents a consortium of criptovalute entities, has contested Wright’s claims, leading to a judicial review of his alleged evidence and testimonies.
The giudice ha espresso una visione feroce della testimonianza di Craig Wright, affermando che durante tutto il processo, Wright ha presentato prove “goffe” nel loro tentativo di ingannare.
“Il dottor Wright non è così intelligente come pensa di essere”, ha osservato il giudice, spiegando che l’imputato si è impegnato in uno schema di bugie, falsificazioni e incolpando gli altri per le discrepanze e le falsità esposte durante il processo.
The ruling states:
“Non appena una bugia è stata smascherata, il dottor Wright ha fatto ricorso a ulteriori bugie ed evasioni. La destinazione finale si è spesso rivelata essere il dottor Wright che incolpava qualche altra persona (spesso non identificata) per la sua situazione o ciò che può essere descritto solo come incoerente.”
Among the falsifications were documents that Wright presented as evidence of his involvement in the creation of Bitcoin, which later proved to have been altered or fabricated.
The court refutes Craig Wright’s claims about Satoshi Nakamoto
The ruling highlighted that, despite Wright’s attempts to appear technologically and forensically astute, the attempts at falsification were amateurish and easily recognizable by experts.
Significantly damaging for Wright’s case was the testimony of Stefan Matthews, president of nChain Group. The latter initially supported Wright, but the statements under examination revealed inconsistencies and deliberate falsehoods.
The judge emphasized that while Matthews was “more careful in his lies,” his testimony ultimately did not withstand the contrary evidence presented by the COPA.
On the contrary, Pieter Wuille, a well-known developer in the Bitcoin community, provided a testimony considered by the judge as “the most significant document of this trial.”
The detailed exposition by Wuille of the chronology and technical details of the development of Bitcoin was crucial in debunking Wright’s claims.
His testimony, not contested by Wright’s defense, provided clear and credible information on the technical functioning of Bitcoin, in stark contrast to the narratives invented by Wright.
The court accuses Craig Wright of “serious abuse” in the Bitcoin case
The ruling highlighted that Dr. Wright’s false statements and subsequent legal maneuvers constituted a “grave abuse” of the court process, not only in the United Kingdom but also in other jurisdictions such as Norway.
The tribunal has postponed the decisions on the specifics of the injunctive measure. With further hearings scheduled to discuss the implications of the ruling and possible corrections to public records regarding the white paper of Bitcoin and other documents.
“Sono pienamente soddisfatto che il dottor Wright abbia mentito alla Corte ampiamente e ripetutamente. La maggior parte delle sue menzogne riguardavano il documento che aveva falsificato e che pretendeva di sostenere la sua affermazione. Tutte le sue bugie e i suoi documenti falsi erano a sostegno della sua più grande bugia: la sua affermazione di essere Satoshi Nakamoto.”
The crypto community has followed the case with keen interest, given its potential implications for the perception of the origin of Bitcoin and the integrity of its fundamental documents.
BitMEX Research, in a statement, highlighted the ongoing legal considerations regarding the accessibility of the Bitcoin whitepaper on platforms like Bitcoin.org, noting that future rulings could further clarify these aspects.
In a humorous side note, BitMEX Research observed:
“The ‘key’ evidence of Danielle DeMorgan, the younger sister of Wright, was that CSW ‘dressed up as a ninja in the local park’. This did not give any credit to Dr. Wright’s claim of being Satoshi: ‘Who would have thought??’
