Greg Maxwell's summary of the judgement on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/1cwbsb9/mellors_main_j...
Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
21–30 of 41 posts
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
He conned a billionaire idiot to bankroll his lawsuits under the idea that should they succeed he'll be able to gain control of the Satoshi coins and presumably give the money back + more. I guess after having spent so much money he's so deep in his lies that his only way was to keep going even as the lies started falling apart (his latest round of fabricated evidence was very sloppy, so I assume he couldn't do a bet…
Doesn't make a lot of sense though, does it? Even if he could convince the judge he was Satoshi, indeed even if he in fact was Satoshi, if he didn't have the keys, he would not be able to spend the coins. Conversely, even if he had no clue who the reals Satoshi was, if he somehow acquired the keys, he would have the coins.
Once he manages to set a legal precedent that he is Satoshi, he could leverage that in his other lawsuits against Bitcoin Core devs to force them to release an update that effectively gives him control of the coins, similar to how the Ethereum community rolled back "The DAO" hack.
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't make a lot of sense though, does it? Even if he could convince the judge he was Satoshi, indeed even if he in fact was Satoshi, if he didn't have the keys, he would not be able to spend the coins. Conversely, even if he had no clue who the reals Satoshi was, if he somehow acquired the keys, he would have the coins.
Once he manages to set a legal precedent that he is Satoshi, he could leverage that in his other lawsuits against Bitcoin Core devs to force them to release an update that effectively gives him control of the coins, similar to how the Ethereum community rolled back "The DAO" hack.
I don't see how that would be possible considering Bitcoin Core was always open source.
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#24[flagged]
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#25[flagged]
Adrian Lamo, in case it is not obvious from this post, has died.
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#26I took part in this trial as a witness (Judge Mellor discusses my testimony in the penultimate section). There are many remarkable things about this case. The judgement is very clearly written and keeps legalese to a minimum. Anyone could read this and understand the case perfectly well. The simplicity of the final judgement helps (Wright is a pathological liar), but still, it's well written and has some amusing sect…
Thanks for taking the time to write this, you write well and I really enjoyed reading it.
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once he manages to set a legal precedent that he is Satoshi, he could leverage that in his other lawsuits against Bitcoin Core devs to force them to release an update that effectively gives him control of the coins, similar to how the Ethereum community rolled back "The DAO" hack.
I don't see how that would be possible considering Bitcoin Core was always open source.
The theorety is that if he got enough legal ammo (and a judgement asserting that Wright is Satoshi would be part of that) he'd be able to force most/all Bitcoin Core devs to push for this change. My understanding is that his legal harassment of Bitcoin Core devs was part of this plan.
Of course in reality it would just lead to a hard fork and sow mayhem in the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#28So glad to see this guy finally outed as a complete fraud. Can't believe he was able to get as far as he did with it all being bullshit. A true testament to the power of abject lying. Edit: Though now that I say this, considering the extent of Wrights fraud, lies and likely debts to get this far there is a very high likelihood of suicide.
I think most people thought he was a fraud before the trial. This should stop him sueing people in bitcoin though. I doubt it'll stop him going on about being Satoshi.
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
He conned a billionaire idiot to bankroll his lawsuits under the idea that should they succeed he'll be able to gain control of the Satoshi coins and presumably give the money back + more. I guess after having spent so much money he's so deep in his lies that his only way was to keep going even as the lies started falling apart (his latest round of fabricated evidence was very sloppy, so I assume he couldn't do a bet…
Doesn't make a lot of sense though, does it? Even if he could convince the judge he was Satoshi, indeed even if he in fact was Satoshi, if he didn't have the keys, he would not be able to spend the coins. Conversely, even if he had no clue who the reals Satoshi was, if he somehow acquired the keys, he would have the coins.
> Doesn't make a lot of sense though, does it?
Sure it does, the billionaire's money spends just as well regardless of the ultimate outcome. In fact, in a sense its better for Wright to lose: "Well shucks if it weren't for that pesky court I totally would have reimbursed the funds you advanced me!"
Re: Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence, Judge Rules
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how that would be possible considering Bitcoin Core was always open source.
The theorety is that if he got enough legal ammo (and a judgement asserting that Wright is Satoshi would be part of that) he'd be able to force most/all Bitcoin Core devs to push for this change. My understanding is that his legal harassment of Bitcoin Core devs was part of this plan. Of course in reality it would just lead to a hard fork and sow mayhem in the Bitcoin ecosystem.
It could have some highly amusing consequences if serious legal pressure was put on bitcoin. It could split bitcoin in half, with miners and users rejecting the pressure and picking one side of the fork, and core devs, mainstream exchanges, and hedge funds being vulnerable to the pressure ending up on the other half. The immediate consequence might be hundreds of billions in value evaporating, but if the legally approved fork won, it could lead to bitcoin going all the way to 0 in the long-run, and being replaced by another currency.