End of an Era: Craig Wright Admits He’s Not Satoshi Nakamoto

Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist who has long claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, has finally admitted that he is not the inventor of Bitcoin. This admission comes after years of legal battles and controversies surrounding his claims.

History of Wright’s Allegations

Despite providing some digital signatures as alleged proof, the contentious figure’s claims have always been met with widespread skepticism.

Wright’s assertions led to several legal confrontations, with Wright having sued multiple individuals and organizations who publicly disputed his claims. Among his legal battles was a notable lawsuit against podcaster Peter McCormack, who called Wright a fraud. Wright won the case but was awarded only nominal damages, as the court found his evidence unconvincing and his conduct deceptive.

The latest major case was brought against him by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), a coalition of cryptocurrency businesses set up to keep cryptocurrency technology free from patents. COPA, backed by industry heavyweights like Block and Coinbase, sought to prevent Wright from claiming to be the true creator of Bitcoin and from suing developers. COPA accused Wright of “industrial-scale” forgery, alleging that he fabricated documents to support his claim.

Justice James Mellor of the High Court of England and Wales presided over the case, ultimately finding that Wright “lied to the court repeatedly and extensively” and that his proof was “forged on a grand scale.” This judgment reconfirmed earlier rulings from March and May, which also concluded that Wright was not the inventor of Bitcoin.

The aDMISSION AND COURT RULING

Following these damning court decisions, Wright was ordered to publish a notice on his website acknowledging that he is not Satoshi Nakamoto. Many have commented that this must be incredibly embarrassing for Wright, considering his entire public persona had been built on a character he claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, which he has now been forced to deny was ever real. This notice, which must remain on his site for six months, states that Wright lied extensively in court and forged documents to create a false narrative. The judge also ordered Wright to post similar notices on his social media and other communication channels to ensure broad dissemination of the court’s findings.

If that wasn’t bad enough for Wright, Justice Mellor also referred the case to the Crown Prosecution Service for consideration of perjury charges against Wright. The judge emphasized the severity of Wright’s actions, describing them as a “most serious abuse” of the legal system in multiple countries, including the UK, Norway, and the US.

fINAL THOUGHTS

Wright’s false claims, although mostly background noise to many, have at times been a major distraction. His admission allows the Bitcoin community to move forward without this looming controversy.

And so, Satoshi’s identity continues to remain a mystery. The lore behind Satoshi and not knowing who he is could be considered one of the most interesting aspects of Bitcoin’s history.

If indeed we do find out one day who it is, would it be a positive or negative for Bitcoin? Although this is a very non-equivalent comparison, those in NFTs will remember the GoblinTown NFT was riding high until it was revealed who the creators were. Sometimes the mystery is better, especially if the answer is less exciting than anticipated. Aliens or a time traveler could be the only exceptions to the notion that Bitcoin’s creator should remain a mystery.