The ‘reveal’
Dr Wright first provided a compilation of his version of the White Paper on 13 December 2023, a little over 24 hours before the PTR. It was self-evident from the content of the compilation {at {L20/248.2}}, when it came, that it was not “materially identical” to the Bitcoin White Paper, let alone an “exact replica”.
Shoosmiths sought to explain the dissimilarity on two footings, which they confirmed would be explained by Dr Wright in his reply witness evidence (see {AB/2/68} at [5]), namely:
The compiled output would “vary according to the parameters and process used for compilation” and it was “necessary to use the compilation process in fact used by Dr Wright when he published the Bitcoin White Paper as Satoshi Nakamoto” (see {AB/2/67} at [2]).
Dr Wright had “since the Bitcoin White Paper was published made a number of minor corrections to the White Paper LaTeX Files to address typographical errors in the published form of the Bitcoin White Paper (for example, replacing quotation marks to open a quotation in the form (“) with double backticks in the form ('') …” (see {AB/2/67} at [3.1]).
The PTR took place on 15 December 2023. At the PTR Dr Wright presented the White Paper LaTeX files as containing a form of digital watermark that rendered them potentially determinative of the identity issue (see Dr Wright’s skeleton [57-57(1)] {R/2/19}), as impossible to reverse engineer (see Dr Wright’s skeleton [57(2)] {R/2/20}) and as uniquely coding for the published form of the Bitcoin White Paper (Dr Wright’s skeleton [57(3)] {R/2/20}).
In my Order from the PTR, I ordered Dr Wright:
In [3], to produce the advice from Ontier upon which had he relied, since I had ruled that privilege had been waived.
In [5], to provide COPA and the Developers inspection of the so-called White Paper LaTeX files in native form on standard Patents Court confidentiality terms.
In [7], to request Overleaf to give access to metadata and current and historic information regarding document activity, revision and edit history and account creation information.
On 18 December 2023 Shoosmiths wrote to COPA confirming that Ontier had informed them that, so far as it was aware:
“a. At no stage during the course of its retainer with Dr Wright (across all litigation matters) did Dr Wright inform Ontier that (i) he had an Overleaf account; (ii) this account may contain documents or be capable of generating documents which may be relevant to the issues in dispute; and/or (iii) the Overleaf account hosted LaTeX code or files which would produce a copy of the Bitcoin White Paper;
b. Ontier has never seen and/or received copies of any documents or material from Overleaf (whether LaTeX code or otherwise)”
As Counsel for the Developers submitted, Dr Wright’s account, as to why the White Paper LaTeX Files had not been disclosed previously, fell apart. Dr Wright hinted that Ontier might have some motivation for lying about his LaTeX files, but the truth is more simple. As explained below, it is highly likely that Dr Wright’s Overleaf account did not exist during the period of Ontier’s instruction.
After the PTR, Shoosmiths produced the so-called White Paper Latex Files on 20 December 2023, by way of a zip folder entitled ‘Bitcoin (3).zip’ {AB/2/31}. The ‘Bitcoin’ folder that was disclosed had been received by Shoosmiths on 24 November 2023 {Shoosmiths’ letter, 10 January 2024}. It was the same folder that had been used to produce the compilation that had been disclosed on 13 December 2023 {Shoosmiths’ letters of 29 December 2023 at [2] & 4 January 2024 at [2]}. The main document path that had been used to create the compilation was a file in the TC subfolder and called main.tex.
Counsel for the Developers submitted that Dr Wright provided only very limited information concerning his Overleaf account(s), and then only reluctantly. I agree that he appears to have believed that the Overleaf platform recorded little or no metadata or document editing history (see {Day15/148:4-9}). I also agree that, in the period between the disclosure of the so-called White Paper LaTeX Files and Dr Wright’s cross-examination about them on 23 February 2023, he appears to have made efforts to prevent the production of that information to the Developers and COPA.
However, acting entirely properly, Shoosmiths had to disclose certain matters on 16 February 2023, mid-way through the trial. Even after that disclosure, it remains the case that we only have a partial view of Dr Wright’s activity in relation to the LaTeX files. The data we have relate to a 7-day period between 17 November 2023 (the date of creation of a folder entitled “Maths (OLD)”) and 24 November 2023 (the date of export of the White Paper LaTeX Files from the ‘Bitcoin’ folder). Counsel for the Developers submitted that even those limited data comprehensively destroy any credibility that the so-called White Paper LaTeX Files might otherwise have had.
This submission is based on the history of Dr Wright’s Overleaf account, pieced together as best as one can in light of the fragmentary information Dr Wright provided. That is then contrasted with Dr Wright’s efforts to avoid the truth of the account coming out.