(London) A British judge ruled Thursday that Australian Craig Wright, who claims the authorship of bitcoin, was not its creator, following the trial opposing him to an association in the sector.
“I have come to the conclusion that the evidence is overwhelming” to declare that “Dr Wright is not the person who created the bitcoin system” nor “the author of the initial versions of the bitcoin software”, declared the judge James Mellor at the end of the trial, explaining that he would detail his reasoning in his upcoming judgment.
The 53-year-old computer scientist and entrepreneur “is not the author of the bitcoin “white paper”, a text which details the founding principles of this cryptocurrency, nor the one who “operated under the pseudonym of Satoshi Nakamoto (l “enigmatic developer known as the father of bitcoin, Editor’s note) during the period from 2008 to 2011”, also affirmed the judge.
For almost a month and a half, the British High Court of Justice examined the claims of the man his detractors nicknamed “Faketoshi” (for “false Satoshi”), who claimed copyright on this founding “white paper”. , as well as the code of this cryptocurrency.
“Dr Wright has failed to provide even a single verifiable and reliable document to support” his claims, said Tuesday Jonathan Hough, the lawyer for the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (Copa), an association which aims to eliminate patents on technologies related to cryptocurrencies. It brings together heavyweights in the sector, such as the Coinbase exchange platform and the company Block, specializing in digital payments.
Copa “will ask after judgment” that British prosecutors consider criminal proceedings for “perjury and obstructing the course of justice”, explained the association in its final written arguments, consulted by AFP.
Justice Mellor did not say when he would make his detailed written judgment public.
The outcome of this case will determine that of another, pitting Mr. Wright against 26 developers, individuals as well as companies like the Coinbase platform, which he accuses of having infringed on his intellectual property rights.