Regulation

Defense Denies COPA Injunction In Satoshi Nakamoto Case

Published

6 months ago

June 7, 2024

Coin2049 Newsletter

In a packed courtroom on June 7, 2024, Craig Steven Wright (CSW) faced a hearing to address potential injunctions and orders following his defeat in several legal battles. Representing the Cryptocurrency Open Patent Alliance (COPA), Jonathan Hough KC outlined the structure of the hearing. It included the COPA claim, the BTC Core claim, the Coinbase claim, and the Tulip Trading claim.

Hough KC Argues For Injunction Against CSW

Hough KC highlighted the immense costs and personal consequences resulting from CSW’s actions. Moreover, he noted that unraveling Wright’s lies cost over 10 million pounds. Furthermore, he detailed the severe personal toll on Peter McCormack and Hodlonaut, two prominent figures, who opposed Wright’s claims.

COPA’s Hough KC highlighted that McCormack suffered stress-induced cardiac issues and hospitalizations, while Hodlonaut faced surveillance. In addition, Hodlonaut also witnessed threats, and had to leave his teaching job, which impacted his six-year-old daughter.

“Their lives were upended by CSW and Ayre’s actions,” Hough KC emphasized. In addition, he cited threatening messages they received. These included one where Calvin Ayre suggested, “judge only needs one troll to pass judgment… just waiting for a volunteer to bankrupt themselves trying to prove a negative.”

Moreover, COPA’s draft order proposed that CSW “shall not pursue proceedings.” They aim to prevent Wright from reasserting his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto in any legal setting globally.

Meanwhile, CSW’s legal team, led by Craig Orr KC, sought to amend “pursue” to “commence” to allow Wright the ability to defend himself. Hough KC argued that this amendment left a loophole. This risks a scenario where a friendly party could sue Wright to revisit the issue.

Also Read: Why SEC Is Unlikely To Target Roaring Kitty As He Exploits Regulatory Loophole

Legal Team Of Craig Steven Wright Counters Injunction

Orr KC countered, invoking Wright’s right to free speech under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act. He stated that CSW believes he is Satoshi, and under Article 10, he should be able to claim he is Satoshi. Hough KC responded that the court had already found that Wright knowingly lied about being Satoshi.

Furthermore, he clarified that the draft order wouldn’t prevent Wright from making such claims in private, only in public forums. The debate extended to the removal of Wright’s previous claims from public records, which is deemed an impossible and overly burdensome task.

Hough KC acknowledged the challenge but suggested it would be less burdensome than the harm inflicted on McCormack and Hodlonaut. COPA sought to compel Wright to post the court’s findings on Twitter, Slack, his website, and in The Times newspaper, with these posts remaining for six months.

Additionally, they requested the referral of Wright, Stefen Matthews, and Robert Jenkins for potential criminal proceedings, citing extensive evidence of perjury and document forgery. However, Orr KC argued that the court’s findings had already been widely publicized in major outlets like the Financial Times and the New York Times.

He criticized COPA’s motives, asserting, “COPA seeks wide-ranging orders to stop CSW re-litigating. COPA is motivated by a desire for revenge and a desire to punish and humiliate CSW. That is not legitimate.” Wright’s attorney further contended that COPA had not suffered any direct harm.

He stated, “COPA is not Satoshi, COPA did not assert IP rights. None of COPA’s IP rights have been violated. COPA has not been defamed, the same applies to the developers.” Orr KC described the relief sought by COPA as “very wide-ranging, novel, and unprecedented.”

Also ReD: Binance Fights to Reduce Size of $13 Billion UK Lawsuit Over BSV Delisting