Close Menu
Technology Mag

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

    What's Hot

    Microsoft announces layoffs that will impact at least 6,000 employees

    May 13, 2025

    Square’s New Handheld Payment Scanner Looks Like a Phone

    May 13, 2025

    Apple’s new Accessibility Reader can customize text across apps — and in real life

    May 13, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Subscribe
    Technology Mag
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube
    • Home
    • News
    • Business
    • Games
    • Gear
    • Reviews
    • Science
    • Security
    • Trending
    • Press Release
    Technology Mag
    Home » Craig Wright Claims He’s Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto. Can He Prove It in Court?
    Business

    Craig Wright Claims He’s Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto. Can He Prove It in Court?

    News RoomBy News RoomFebruary 2, 20243 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Reddit WhatsApp Email

    Satoshi Nakamoto is the founding father of cryptocurrency—and a mystery.

    In October 2008, Nakamoto gave Bitcoin to the world. Then they disappeared. To this day, nobody knows who Nakamoto is. Amongst the speculation, one man stepped forward: Craig Wright, an Australian computer scientist who has, since 2016, maintained that he is Nakamoto. Now he’ll have to prove it in court.

    On February 5, a trial will begin in the UK High Court, the purpose of which is to challenge Wright’s claim to Satoshi-hood. The case is being brought by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), a nonprofit consortium of crypto and tech firms, in response to a slew of lawsuits filed by Wright against Bitcoin developers and other parties, in which he is trying to assert intellectual property rights over Bitcoin as its ostensible creator.

    In its complaint, COPA claims that Wright’s behavior has had a “chilling effect,” obstructing the progress of Bitcoin by scaring away developers. It is seeking a declaration that Wright does not own the copyright to the white paper that first proposed Bitcoin and did not author the original code, and an injunction preventing him from saying otherwise. In effect, COPA is asking the court to rule that Wright is not Nakamoto.

    The verdict will have direct implications for a tangle of interlocking cases, which will determine whether Wright can prevent developers from working on Bitcoin without his permission and dictate the terms under which the Bitcoin system can be used.

    “The stakes are very high,” says a representative of the Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit that helps Bitcoin developers defend against legal action, who asked to remain nameless for fear of legal retaliation from Wright. “In the eyes of the law,” they claim, Wright “is asking for ultimate control over the Bitcoin network.”

    Wright declined to be interviewed for this story.

    In their 2008 white paper, released in the shadow of a global financial meltdown, Nakamoto sketched a vision for a new electronic money and peer-to-peer payment system that would obviate the need for troublesome intermediaries like banks. In January 2009, they sent the first Bitcoin transaction. A little more than two years later, they disappeared without a trace. The hunt for Nakamoto began.

    The absence of a “leader,” says software developer and early Bitcoin adopter Jameson Lopp, has been an asset to Bitcoin in the period since, making it “robust” by demanding it evolve under a system of unspoiled anarchy. Free from the overbearing influence of a founder, anyone that volunteered their time to work on Bitcoin could have a say in its direction. Yet Wright’s claim to be Nakamoto threatens to complicate matters.

    Wright was first nominated as a potential candidate by both WIRED and Gizmodo on the same day in December 2015. The original story, based on a trove of leaked documents, proposed that Wright had “either invented Bitcoin or is a brilliant hoaxer who very badly wants us to believe he did.” A few days later, WIRED published a second story, pointing to discrepancies in the evidence that supported the latter interpretation.

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Email
    Previous ArticleVision Pro launch: all the news about Apple’s pricey new headset
    Next Article Indie labels cry foul over Apple Music’s enhanced spatial audio royalties

    Related Posts

    My X Account Was Hijacked to Sell a Fake WIRED Memecoin. Then Came the Backlash

    May 12, 2025

    Buy Now or Pay More Later? ‘Macroeconomic Uncertainty’ Has Shoppers Anxious

    May 12, 2025

    Donald Trump’s UK Trade Deal Could Secure Jaguar’s Resurrection

    May 9, 2025

    Singapore’s Vision for AI Safety Bridges the US-China Divide

    May 9, 2025

    A ‘Trump Card Visa’ Is Already Showing Up in Immigration Forms

    May 8, 2025

    OpenAI and the FDA Are Holding Talks About Using AI In Drug Evaluation

    May 8, 2025
    Our Picks

    Square’s New Handheld Payment Scanner Looks Like a Phone

    May 13, 2025

    Apple’s new Accessibility Reader can customize text across apps — and in real life

    May 13, 2025

    US Border Agents Are Asking for Help Taking Photos of Everyone Entering the Country by Car

    May 13, 2025

    Square’s $399 Handheld accepts tap-to-pay at your table

    May 13, 2025
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • Instagram
    • YouTube
    • Vimeo
    Don't Miss
    Gear

    How to Use Apple Maps on the Web

    By News RoomMay 13, 2025

    The boundaries of Apple’s walled garden aren’t as well defined as they used to be;…

    DJI is skipping the US with its most advanced drone yet

    May 13, 2025

    Microsoft extends Office app support on Windows 10 to 2028

    May 13, 2025

    Microsoft reveals its rejected Start menu redesigns

    May 13, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of use
    • Advertise
    • Contact
    © 2025 Technology Mag. All Rights Reserved.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.