A court in London decided this Monday, the 5th, that the maker Bitcoin is anonymous. After that there was an investigation Craig WrightAn Australian computer scientist requested identification Satoshi Nakamoto, nicknamed the “owner” of the cryptocurrency. But the judge ruled that the allegation was false.
This Tuesday, the 6th, during the process of yet another trial to be held, Mr Crypto Patent Coalition (CUP)Helped Jack Dorsey is the creator of Twitter Objected to Wright's claim, saying the claim was “a blatant lie and an elaborate misrepresentation, supported by falsification on an industrial scale.”
A panel led by British Supreme Court Justice Sir James Mellor found that the evidence submitted by the scientist was false and fabricated, including the creation of a story that could support his hypothesis with the help of SatGPD. Indeed, Nakamoto was.
“Based on his dishonest claim to be Satoshi, he claimed to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars against several people. Wright consistently failed to provide any real evidence for his claim to be Satoshi: instead, he repeatedly submitted documents showing clear signs of fraud,” World Cup representative Jonathan Hough said at the hearing. said.
However, according to Wright's defense, the Australian has enough evidence to prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto and the true author of Bitcoin. One of the pieces of evidence, according to Wright's lawyer, Lord Grabiner, is that he has files that demonstrate his research into the cryptocurrency before it was launched, and the lack of candidates claiming a pseudonym. The scientist claims to be the creator of Bitcoin since 2016.
“This issue has been the subject of extensive media coverage since early 2016, as well as numerous court cases in this jurisdiction and elsewhere. If not Wright Satoshi, expect the real Satoshi to come forward to fight the charges,” Grabiner pointed out.
One of the biggest points of contention is that the original Bitcoin code was written in a software called OpenOffice, but the version provided by Wright was written in LaTeX software. Another point of contention was Wright's failure to provide code compatible with the key that locked the original Bitcoins.
Now, the court in London is expected to hear Wright's statement at another hearing and make a final decision next month, when Mellor will issue a statement with the opinion.
