After a long and highly publicized legal battle, Australian computer scientist Craig Wright’s claim of being the creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, has been completely refuted by a ruling from Judge James Mellor in the High Court of Justice of the United Kingdom.
The ruling was made in response to a case brought against Wright by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), a coalition of prominent companies seeking to prevent Wright from asserting ownership over Bitcoin’s core intellectual property. COPA alleged that Wright had engaged in an elaborate scheme of forgery and deceit to fabricate evidence supporting his claim.
During the trial in February 2024, COPA’s legal team systematically discredited Wright’s credibility by presenting a wealth of evidence and expert testimony that exposed the fabrications and inconsistencies in his purported proof. The alliance’s lawyers harshly criticized Wright’s conduct, accusing him of lying on an extraordinary scale and inventing an entire biographical history to support his claims.
As the trial progressed, forensic experts and cryptocurrency analysts provided damning testimony that systematically tore apart Wright’s evidence, revealing numerous instances of document forgery, manipulation, and fabrication. The analysis exposed glaring inconsistencies in metadata, formatting anomalies, and technical inaccuracies that would not be characteristic of the actual creator of Bitcoin.
In his ruling, Judge Mellor left no room for doubt, unequivocally stating that Wright is not the author of the Bitcoin white paper and did not operate under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto during the crucial period from 2008 to 2011. He conclusively stated that Wright was “not the creator of the Bitcoin network.”
Despite the court’s clear ruling, Wright expressed his intention to appeal the decision, acknowledging the support of his followers and their continued encouragement. He also provided an update on his work with Teranode, a scalable implementation of the Bitcoin protocol, claiming that it is on the verge of scaling beyond three million transactions per second.
Judge Mellor’s 231-page judgment thoroughly analyzed the evidence presented during the trial, with a significant focus on the allegations of forgery. The court examined numerous documents, including emails, blog posts, and technical papers, which Wright had presented as evidence supporting his claim. These documents were found to have inconsistencies in metadata, altered dates, and formatting anomalies, suggesting forgery and fabrication.
The court also scrutinized Wright’s demeanor and responses during cross-examinations, noting that he frequently evaded direct questions and provided convoluted explanations. The judge remarked that an individual with genuine expertise in Bitcoin’s creation would not need to resort to such tactics. Wright’s responses were marked by inconsistencies and falsehoods, often shifting blame to unidentified third parties or presenting unfounded conspiracy theories.
The ruling in COPA vs. Wright has significant legal and precedential implications for intellectual property rights and global crypto laws. It emphasizes the importance of establishing credibility and rigorous evidence examination in legal proceedings related to digital assets. Furthermore, the ruling reinforces Bitcoin’s decentralized nature, allowing the community to focus on development and adoption without the threat of unfounded ownership claims.
Moving forward, it is expected that the Bitcoin community will shift its focus to exploring new use cases and fostering mainstream acceptance of the digital currency, rather than dealing with legal entanglements of this nature.