Dr Wright’s activities following his move to the UK.
The Wired and Gizmodo publications were followed by a series of events involving Dr Wright:
Dr Wright entered into a ‘Life Story Rights and Services Agreement’ with EITC Holdings Limited (“EITC”) (the “EITC Agreement”), dated 17th February 2016.
In early March 2016, Dr Wright performed two private demonstrations for Mr Andrew O’Hagan (“Mr O’Hagen”), during which (on Dr Wright’s case) he demonstrated possession of a private key to one of the original blocks (i.e. blocks 1 to 11). COPA disputes Dr Wright’s case on this demonstration.
In mid-March 2016, Dr Wright held a ‘private proof session’ with Mr Jon Matonis (“Mr Matonis”). On Dr Wright’s case, he demonstrated to Mr Matonis that he had access to the private keys associated with two early blocks in the Bitcoin blockchain. COPA disputes Dr Wright’s case on this demonstration.
In early April 2016, Dr Wright held a ‘private proof session’ with Mr Gavin Andresen (“Mr Andresen”), during which (on Dr Wright’s case) he demonstrated to Mr Andresen that he had access to the private keys associated with two early blocks in the Bitcoin blockchain. COPA disputes Dr Wright’s case on this demonstration.
In late April 2016, Dr Wright had a meeting with Mr Rory Cellan-Jones (“Mr Cellan-Jones”) of the BBC. On Dr Wright’s case, he demonstrated that he was in possession of the private key associated with block 9 of the Bitcoin blockchain. COPA disputes Dr Wright’s case on this demonstration.
Also in late April 2016, Dr Wright had a meeting with Mr Ludwig Siegele (“Mr Siegele”) of The Economist. On Dr Wright’s case, he demonstrated that he was in possession of the private key associated with block 9 of the Bitcoin blockchain. COPA disputes Dr Wright’s case on this demonstration.
On 29 April 2016, Dr Wright was interviewed by Mr Stuart McGurk (“Mr McGurk”), a reporter for GQ Magazine, and Dr Nicholas Courtois (“Dr Courtois”) of University College London.
Those demonstrations were part of the lead-up to the ‘Big Reveal’, as planned by Dr Wright’s team (which included a PR firm). The Big Reveal involved the following happening simultaneously on 2 May 2016:
Dr Wright publicly asserted his identity as Satoshi;
Mr Andresen and Mr Matonis made blog posts stating that they had been convinced that Dr Wright was Satoshi;
Articles from the BBC and The Economist were made public;
A post was uploaded onto the blog website hosted at www.drcraigwright.net (the “Blog Website”) entitled “Jean-Paul Sartre, signing and significance” (the “Sartre Message”). Following the posting of the Sartre Message, online commentators posted articles commenting on the significance and probative value of the Sartre Message. There is disagreement between the parties about Mr Andresen’s subsequent views on whether Dr Wright is Satoshi.
On 3 May 2016, a blog post was published on the Blog Website, which referred to Dr Wright providing “extraordinary proof” (the “3 May Post”).
On 4 May 2016, on Dr Wright’s evidence, he self-harmed by cutting his throat with a knife, lost consciousness and was taken to hospital in an ambulance.
The Kleiman claim was commenced on 14 February 2018. The following description of the claim is taken from the Judgment of District Judge Bloom in that case dated 18th September 2020:
‘The Complaint alleges that Defendant and David Kleiman ("David Kleiman" or "Mr. Kleiman") were former business partners that created Bitcoin under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. Between 2008 and before David Kleiman's death in April 2013, the two allegedly worked together on Bitcoin, mining bitcoins and developing blockchain related intellectual property. Starting in 2008 through February 2011, they allegedly worked together as a partnership, and from February 2011 until Mr. Kleiman's death in 2013, they conducted their work through Plaintiff W&K Info Defense Research LLC ("W&K"). During this period, significant amounts of bitcoins allegedly were mined and acquired by Defendant and Mr. Kleiman and valuable intellectual property was developed. This lawsuit concerns a dispute over the ownership of bitcoins and Bitcoin-related intellectual property.
The Complaint alleges that following David Kleiman's death, Defendant perpetrated a fraudulent scheme to seize Plaintiffs' bitcoins and their rights to certain blockchain related intellectual property. This scheme included, among other things, producing fraudulent documents and forging David Kleiman's signatures on documents to purportedly show that David Kleiman transferred to Defendant bitcoins and intellectual property rights belonging to David Kleiman and W&K before David Kleiman's death. Since then, Defendant has taken sole ownership and control over the bitcoins and related intellectual property and refuses to return any bitcoins or intellectual property to either the estate or W&K. Plaintiffs seek relief against Defendant through various causes of action: …’
Dr Wright was deposed several times in that case (e.g. in June 2019) and also gave evidence at trial. At this Trial, reference was made to numerous passages in the transcripts of the evidence given by Dr Wright and other witnesses.
The agreed chronology then moves to 2019-2021 and I have added references to other proceedings which have touched on the Identity Issue:
On 10 February 2019, Dr Wright published on Twitter images appearing to be the front page and abstract of his BlackNet paper, in which the abstract contained language similar to that in the Bitcoin White Paper. This is the BlackNet Abstract which I deal with in section 4 of the Appendix. It is COPA’s case that he falsely presented it as a precursor work. Dr Wright disputes that.
On 17 April 2019, Dr Wright sued Peter McCormack for libel, the proceedings being concerned with a series of tweets published between 29 March and 29 August 2019, plus a YouTube video published on 18 October 2019 in which it was alleged that Dr Wright was not Satoshi and his claims to be Satoshi were fraudulent. Mr McCormack initially pleaded a defence of truth, but in late 2020, he abandoned that defence. So, whether Dr Wright is or is not Satoshi was not an issue which Chamberlain J. had to determine in his trial Judgment: [2022] EWHC 2058 (QB), 1 August 2022 (“McCormack”).
On 26 June 2019, Dr Wright sued Magnus Granath in the UK for libel (QB-2019-002311) in relation to Mr Granath’s Twitter account, hodlonaut, and his tweet of 17 March 2019 ‘The forensics to CSW’s first attempt to fraudulently ‘prove’ he is Satoshi. Enabled by @gavinandresen. Never forget. #CraigWrightIsAFraud’.
Mr Granath brought proceedings in his native country Norway seeking negative declarations i.e. that his statements about Dr Wright were not unlawful, Granath v Wright, (19-076844TVI-TOSL/04) (“Granath”). The trial was heard in October 2022 by Judge Engebrigtsen. In her written Judgment dated 20 October 2022, seen in translation, Judge Engebrigsten ruled in favour of Mr Granath and ordered Dr Wright to pay costs. Several of the witnesses who gave evidence in this Trial also gave evidence in Norway and reference was made to various passages in the transcripts of their evidence in Norway in October 2022.
On 21 August 2019, Dr Wright uploaded to the SSRN website a version of the Bitcoin White Paper, with details indicating that he was the author. It is COPA’s case that he falsely presented this version as written in August 2008. Dr Wright disputes that case.
On 13 February 2020, Dr Wright published a blog entitled “Forking and Passing Off” in which he asserted his claim to be “the sole creator of Bitcoin” and evinced an intention to enforce claimed intellectual property rights as such.
On 19 February 2021, SCA Ontier LLP (“Ontier”), the solicitors then acting for Dr Wright, wrote to Bird & Bird LLP (the solicitors for COPA) indicating that Dr Wright did not consent to COPA or its members using the Bitcoin White Paper and asking that both COPA and its members remove the Bitcoin White Paper from their respective websites and social media accounts.