The Law Society Gazette: ‘Satoshi perjuror’ must be referred to DPP, court hears

“The cryptocurrency entrepreneur whose false claim to be bitcoin inventor ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’ has filled more than 80 days of court hearings should be prosecuted for perjury, the High Court heard yesterday.

Dr Craig Wright had mounted a five-year campaign of ‘litigation terrorism’, Jonathan Hough KC told a one-day hearing following Mr Justice Mellor’s ruling last month that the Satoshi claim was fabricated. In defending his position Wright produced hundreds of forged documents and made ‘literally thousands of lies under oath’, Hough said. ‘If there were ever a case for a referral of the papers to the authorities with a view to prosecution, it is that of Dr Wright in this case.’

Hough, for the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), asked the judge for injunctive relief, including, as well as costs on the indemnity basis:

  • an anti-suit injunction preventing Wright from attempting to re-litigate the case
  • an order requiring Wright to disseminate the Mellor judgment
  • the court’s permission to re-use disclosed documents in the case
  • a refusal of permission to appeal
  • referral of the case to the Crown Prosecution Service.

For Wright, Craig Orr KC argued that many of the ‘unprecendented’ terms sought by COPA were unnecessary. Rather, they were ’motivated by a desire for revenge and a desire to punish and humiliate Dr Wright’, he said. Any order barring Wright from repeating his claim to be ‘Satoshi’ would infringe his article 10 right to free speech, Orr said. He told the judge that, even following a criminal conviction for a serious crime, it would ’be unheard of to injunct a defendant against asserting their innocence’. 

Meanwhile Wright had no intention of threatening or pursuing future proceedings, ’and no wish to waste time and resources debating the point’.

However the court heard that on the very day of the hearing, Wright had posted a YouTube video in which he referred to authoring the seminal ‘Satosh’ white paper first describing bitcoin.”

Read the full story at the Law Society Gazette

CoinDesk: ‘Craig Wright Should Pay Plaintiffs’ Legal Bill After Found Posing as Satoshi, COPA Says’

“The Crypto Open Patent Alliance’s (COPA) legal representatives on Friday asked Judge James Mellor to grant that Craig Wright pay 85% of the costs the group incurred in the legal proceedings.

Jonathan Hough, one of COPA’s legal representatives, asked that Wright be given a civil restraint order to stop him from pursuing any other legal court cases, because “he has poured out threats.” COPA also offered to submit a list of online posts that Wright should take down.

Hough said that this case should also be put forward for criminal proceedings following the courts judgement that Wright committed multiple forgeries during the trial. The Bitcoin developers who joined this case also asked that Wright pay for 85.2% of their costs.

Unless Wright was prevented from doing so, he would continue to “propagate lies,” Hough argued.

“There is a powerful public interest in them [lies] being brought to an end now,” Hough said, pointing to the litigation that spanned more than five years that Wright had brought against COPA members such as Coinbase Inc. (COIN) and Kraken, among others.”

Read the full story at CoinDesk

Daily Mail: ‘Computer scientist lied that he was Bitcoin founder Satoshi Nakamoto and committed ‘clumsy’ forgeries ‘on a grand scale”

“The High Court has ruled that a computer scientist lied ‘extensively and repeatedly’ in a failed bid to claim he was Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonym attributed to the person credited with creating Bitcoin. 

Dr Craig Wright lost a legal battle with the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (Copa), a non-profit group including cryptocurrency firms, in March after the group claimed he committed ‘forgery on an industrial scale’ to support a ‘brazen lie’ that he was Satoshi.

Following a five-week trial, High Court judge Mr Justice Mellor ruled that there was ‘overwhelming’ evidence to prove that the Australian was not behind the pseudonym, and had not written the cryptocurrency’s founding document, known as the Bitcoin White Paper.

In written reasons for his decision, handed down on Monday, the judge said that he was ‘entirely satisfied’ that Dr Wright repeatedly lied and committed ‘clumsy’ forgeries ‘on a grand scale’ to support his claims.

He said: ‘Dr Wright presents himself as an extremely clever person. However, in my judgment, he is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is.”

Read the full story at Daily Mail

New York Times: ‘This Man Did Not Invent Bitcoin’

“Dr. Wright had a financial interest in squelching their work: He and a gambling tycoon had joined forces to promote an alternative digital currency, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision, that they claimed was a pure, uncorrupted version of Bitcoin, with better practical applications.

This year, Bitcoin’s price surged to an all-time high, renewing optimism that crypto is destined for widespread adoption. But the industry is still tarnished by a procession of recent financial scandals that cost investors billions in savings. The mystery of Satoshi is the last remnant of a more innocent time in its history, when crypto was a renegade, communal system that seemed to have materialized out of thin air.

Dr. Wright’s claim to Satoshi-dom wasn’t simply an antagonistic legal strategy: It was a threat to the purity of that founding myth. This year, several of crypto’s most powerful companies mobilized to stop Dr. Wright from bringing cases. An influential group led by Coinbase, the largest U.S. exchange, and Block, a company started by the Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, took him to trial in High Court in London.

They were seeking a judicial declaration: We may never know for sure who invented Bitcoin, but it wasn’t Craig Wright.

As the trial reached its conclusion in March, a few of Dr. Wright’s supporters, mostly investors in Bitcoin Satoshi Vision, gathered in the courtroom to watch his final stand. Mr. Ayre was not among them. He had written some supportive messages for Dr. Wright on X, but he spent the morning of closing arguments in a pool, drinking beer and posting clips from “The Godfather” on social media.

As Dr. Wright’s legal team tried to address the forgery claims, Mr. Ayre began texting a New York Times reporter. “Drunk and happy,” he wrote in one of dozens of typo-riddled messages. (The texts came from a number that Mr. Ayre had used in the past; it was later disconnected.)

The trial was “old powers wanting to slow innovation,” Mr. Ayre wrote. He used a series of vulgar expressions to describe his business rivals and said only a “moron” would disbelieve Dr. Wright.

“Craig is Satoshi,” Mr. Ayre declared. “He is also 14 year old kid.”

A few minutes later, the judge overseeing the proceedings, James Mellor, issued a ruling from the bench. “Dr. Wright is not the person who adopted or operated under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto,” he said.

Crypto fans celebrated online, proclaiming the end of a “reign of terror.” Mr. Dorsey, the Twitter founder, posted the full text of Justice Mellor’s ruling. In a closing submission, COPA’s lawyers called for the court papers to be forwarded to British prosecutors, who could investigate whether Dr. Wright had committed perjury.

This week, Justice Mellor elaborated on his conclusions in a 231-page ruling, finding that Dr. Wright had forged numerous documents. “He is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is,” Justice Mellor wrote. Dr. Wright has already dropped his defamation claim, as well as one suit he filed against Bitcoin developers. But a message posted to his X account on Monday said he planned to appeal the COPA ruling.”

Read the full story at the New York Times

Judge Rules Craig Wright’s Claim to Be Satoshi Nakamoto is “Pure Fantasy”

On Monday, Mr. Justice Mellor handed down his written judgment on the COPA lawsuit brought against Craig Wright on the grounds that his claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto were fraudulent. The judgment follows on the heels of Mr. Justice Mellor’s March 18 oral declaration that Wright was not Satoshi Nakamoto, and marks the formal end of COPA’s lawsuit. As Mr. Justice Mellor wrote in his ruling, “The conclusion is inescapable in my judgment. Dr Wright was lying…I agree that his application was a fraud on the Court and a fraud on COPA and the Developers.”

The judgment is a major victory for the Bitcoin developers that have been subjected to Wright’s nearly decade-long campaign of harassment and intimidation based on fraudulent claims that he was Bitcoin’s creator. The ruling bars Wright from further Bitcoin-related IP claims in the UK, allowing developers to contribute code with renewed confidence that they will not be harassed and intimidated for their work on Bitcoin. 

The judgment is also a major victory for the open source developer community more broadly insofar as the judgment is legally binding in several other cases Wright has brought against Bitcoin developers, including the Tulip Trading case. Following Mr. Justice Mellor’s oral ruling in March, Wright withdrew his lawsuit against the developers in the Tulip Trading case as well as an appeal in a lawsuit brought against Hodlonaut. 

The 231-page judgment detailed the extent of Wright’s lies and how he used them to  harass open source developers who contributed to Bitcoin Core. Several key remarks from Mr. Justice Mellor’s ruling are included below: 

“Dr Wright presents himself as an extremely clever person. However, in my judgment, he is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is. In both his written evidence and in days of oral evidence under cross-examination, I am entirely satisfied that Dr Wright lied to the Court extensively and repeatedly. Most of his lies related to the documents he had forged which purported to support his claim. All his lies and forged documents were in support of his biggest lie: his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.”

“In my judgment, the evidence was overwhelming that the suggestion that Dr Wright drafted the Bitcoin White Paper or anything like it is pure fabrication. The account he gave in his witness statement(s)…was pure fantasy.”

“In my judgment, Dr Wright’s elaborate attempt to carve an alternative narrative by forging documents in LaTeX mark him as a fraud and his claim in these proceedings as a fraudulent claim…The real explanation for Dr Wright’s evidence is that he did not know what he was talking about…because he had not used LaTeX in the way that he was describing.”

“COPA faced a constantly moving target of forged documents produced by Dr Wright which continued up to the start of trial and, indeed, during it.”

In both his written evidence and in days of oral evidence under cross-examination,I am entirely satisfied that Dr Wright lied to the Court extensively and repeatedly.”

“I am satisfied that every element of Dr Wright’s factual and technical explanation of Satoshi’s PGP key was wrong. The Developers submitted that one inference to be drawn from that shortcoming in his evidence, and from the sharp change in that evidence following disclosure of Mr Malmi’s emails, is that Dr Wright was telling these lies to avoid the inference to be drawn from his failure to sign a message using Satoshi’s PGP key. I agree.”

“Overall, there is strong evidence and I find that the Tulip Trust was another invention of Dr Wright’s, initially as part of an attempt to shield assets from a possible bankruptcy in Australia. Having invented it, he attempted to use it in Kleiman to avoid having to identify the bitcoin he supposedly owned, yet that attempt failed.”

“Overall, in my judgment, … Dr Wright’s attempts to prove he was/is Satoshi Nakamoto represent a most serious abuse of this Court’s process. The same point applies to other jurisdictions as well: Norway in particular. Although whether Dr Wright was Satoshi was not actually in issue in Kleiman, that litigation would not have occurred but for his claim to be Satoshi. In all three jurisdictions, it is clear that Dr Wright engaged in the deliberate production of false documents to support false claims and use the Courts as a vehicle for fraud. Despite acknowledging in this Trial that a few documents were inauthentic (generally blamed on others), he steadfastly refused to acknowledge any of the forged documents. Instead, he lied repeatedly and extensively in his attempts to deflect the allegations of forgery.”

Read the full judgment

Read the judgment appendix detailing instances of forgery

Reuters: ‘Self-proclaimed bitcoin inventor lied ‘repeatedly’ to support claim, says UK judge’

“An Australian computer scientist who claimed he invented bitcoin lied “extensively and repeatedly” and forged documents “on a grand scale” to support his false claim, a judge at London’s High Court ruled on Monday.

Craig Wright had long claimed to have been the author of a 2008 white paper, the foundational text of bitcoin, published under the pseudonym “Satoshi Nakamoto”.

But Judge James Mellor ruled in March that the evidence Wright was not Satoshi was “overwhelming”, after a trial in a case brought by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) to stop Wright suing bitcoin developers.

Mellor gave reasons for his conclusions on Monday, stating in a written ruling: “Dr Wright presents himself as an extremely clever person. However, in my judgment, he is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is.”

The judge added: “All his lies and forged documents were in support of his biggest lie: his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.”

Mellor also said that Wright’s actions in suing developers and his expressed views about bitcoin also pointed against him being Satoshi.”

Read the full article on Reuters

Bitcoin Magazine: ‘Fake Satoshi’ Craig Wright Lied About Inventing Bitcoin, Judge Rules

“A UK judge has ruled that Craig Wright, who claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin, lied extensively and forged documents during a high-profile trial.

In a scathing 231-page judgment, Justice James Mellor stated that Wright “lied to the court repeatedly” and committed forgery “on a grand scale” in a failed attempt to prove he was Nakamoto. 

A group of crypto firms brought the civil trial, the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), that sought to prevent Wright from claiming he invented Bitcoin.

Mellor wrote that Wright presented fake documents and gave false testimony in support of “his biggest lie – his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.”

The judge determined Wright is neither the author of the Bitcoin white paper nor the person behind the Satoshi pseudonym from 2008-2011.

Furthermore, Mellor ruled Wright does not have copyright ownership that would enable him to sue Bitcoin developers, as he has done in the past.

The judge slammed Wright’s narrative as “riddled with inconsistencies and absurd explanations” and said Wright was “not nearly as clever as he thinks he is.”

Read the full article at Bitcoin Magazine

Financial Times: ‘Highlights from the evisceration of Craig Wright’

“FT Alphaville was in at the start of the performance art project known as Craig Wright. We’re obliged therefore to mark the end of what should (but probably won’t be) his last act.

A UK court ruled in March, after a month-long trial, that Wright was not Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous inventor of bitcoin. The Crypto Open Patent Alliance, an industry group, had brought the case in an effort to halt his legal actions against bitcoin developers. Published today is the full judgment (PDF) which runs for 231 pages, with a 150 page appendix to cover the many forgeries submitted to court. The first-page summary is a succinct scene-setter:

“Dr Wright presents himself as an extremely clever person. However, in my judgment, he is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is. In both his written evidence and in days of oral evidence under cross-examination, I am entirely satisfied that Dr Wright lied to the Court extensively and repeatedly. Most of his lies related to the documents he had forged which purported to support his claim. All his lies and forged documents were in support of his biggest lie: his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.”

Read the full article on Financial Times

WIRED: ‘Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin And Faked Evidence, Judge Rules’

“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.

In a written judgment published on May 20, Justice James Mellor ruled that Wright forged reams of documents in service of his charade. “It is clear that Dr Wright engaged in the deliberate production of false documents to support false claims and use the Courts as a vehicle for fraud,” he wrote. “ I am entirely satisfied that Dr Wright lied to the Court extensively and repeatedly. All his lies and forged documents were in support of his biggest lie: his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.”

“Dr Wright presents himself as an extremely clever person,” Mellor added. “However, in my judgment, he is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is.”

Read the full story on WIRED

CoinDesk: ‘Craig Wright Lied to UK Court ‘Extensively and Repeatedly,’ Judge Writes’

“Craig Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly” in both his written and oral evidence in the Crypto Open Patent Alliance case regarding his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, Judge James Mellor said in his written judgement on Monday.

Mellor also concluded that the issue of injunctive relief – a legal remedy to stop a defendant from doing something – will be argued at a Form of Order hearing that will be appointed after the judgment has been handed down.

“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,” Mellor said after both parties to the trial had presented their evidence.”

“I am entirely satisfied that Dr Wright lied to the Court extensively and repeatedly,” Mellor said. “Most of his lies related to the documents he had forged which purported to support his claim.””

Read the full story on CoinDesk