Craig Wright Is Not Satoshi Nakamoto

A court in the United Kingdom has declared that Craig Wright, an Australian computer scientist who claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, is not the author of the Bitcoin whitepaper.

The judgment, delivered by Judge James Mellor, is a significant blow to Wright. He has embroiled himself in legal battles over his assertions.

Craig Wright Is Not Satoshi

The Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), a consortium dedicated to preventing litigation over open-source technology within the crypto industry, initiated the lawsuit. COPA’s aim was to halt Wright’s ongoing legal actions against developers and other community members for alleged intellectual property infringement related to Bitcoin’s foundational technology.

After a month-long trial, Judge Mellor found the evidence against Wright’s claims to be “overwhelming.” Mellor is expected to elaborate on his conclusions in a forthcoming detailed ruling, notably that Wright did not develop Bitcoin.

“I will make certain declarations which I am satisfied are useful and are necessary to do justice between the parties. First, that Dr Wright is not the author of the Bitcoin White Paper. Second, Dr Wright is not the person who adopted or operated under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto in the period 2008 to 2011. Third, Dr Wright is not the person who created the Bitcoin System. And, fourth, he is not the author of the initial versions of the Bitcoin software,” Judge Mellor said.

Read more: Satoshi Nakamoto – Who is the Founder of Bitcoin?

This verdict is a triumph for COPA, supported by industry heavyweights such as Jack Dorsey, Coinbase, and other notable entities. The decision vindicates the consortium’s position and impacts related cases. These include Wright’s claims against Coinbase and Dorsey’s Block, asserting rights to the Bitcoin blockchain’s database.

Through his counsel, Lord Anthony Grabiner, Wright contested COPA’s request for injunctions to permanently bar him from claiming to be Bitcoin’s creator. He argued it would unduly infringe on his freedom of expression. Grabiner described such a prohibition as “sinister,” emphasizing the importance of Wright’s ability to communicate his identity.

The court’s decision comes amidst intense scrutiny of Wright’s claims. These include allegations against Wright of forgery and perjury, which COPA has suggested UK prosecutors should investigate.