Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Bitcoin Crime

Craig Wright Convicted For Repeatedly Lying About Inventing Bitcoin 28

Craig Wright, an Australian computer scientist living in the UK, has been found guilty of contempt of court for persistently and falsely claiming to be Bitcoin's creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, despite a High Court ruling against his claim. He has been sentenced to 12 months in prison, suspended for two years, and faces jail if he continues his assertions. The BBC reports: [...] Wright, who appeared via videolink, refused to disclose where he was, saying only he was in Asia. It means an international arrest warrant would have to be issued if the UK authorities wanted to detain him.

Wright's actions were described in court as "legal terrorism" that "put people through personal hell" in his campaign to be recognised as Bitcoin's inventor. The judge, Mr Justice Mellor, said Wright arguments were "legal nonsense" but acknowledged that he was not in the UK and "appears to be well aware of countries with which the UK does not have extradition arrangements".

Craig Wright Convicted For Repeatedly Lying About Inventing Bitcoin

Comments Filter:
  • "I invented Bitcoin." "When I was 14." "I even got a trademark for it: BITCOIN (sorry, caps-lock button had gum on it.)

    No need to be in Asia to avoid UK jail (term suspended for 2 years so he's not about to be nicked.)
    Just come to the US and run for Congress.

    • by RonVNX ( 55322 )

      Shiva, I had no idea you were on Slashdot. Can't wait for your next site, inventorofbitcoin.com . Maybe you can get an actress to marry you again.

  • About bloody time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RUs1729 ( 10049396 ) on Thursday December 19, 2024 @06:48PM (#65027033)
    This buffoon has had plenty of opportunities to prove that he's Satoshi Nakamoto and he always falls short when the time comes for him to put forth the necessary evidence. He's nothing but a busybody and a scammer. His comeuppance is most welcome.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by sfcat ( 872532 )
      Serious question...why is this illegal. Unethical to be sure, but illegal? Is he using this assertion to scam people? If not, this seems like overreach. If so, shouldn't he be going to jail for fraud?
      • Re:About bloody time (Score:4, Interesting)

        by pjt33 ( 739471 ) on Thursday December 19, 2024 @06:56PM (#65027057)

        A campaigning organisation obtained an injunction to make him stop claiming to be Satoshi. He's just been ruled to have broken the injunction.

      • Your allowed to lie, in general, with two , sometimes three, exception.

        1) Your not allowed to defame people. Thats a Civil offense (in some countries it can be a criminal one, but usually just dealt with Civilly, ie lawsuit)

        2) Your not allowed to lie to obtain material advantage. Thats a Criminal offense , Fraud. Oftren its also Civil (Ie your committing a crime, AND you can be sued)

        3) In most countries you really cant go harming others with lies, Ie convincing them to not get cancer treatment by claiming d

      • Serious question...why is this illegal. Unethical to be sure, but illegal?

        Presumably because Mr. Wright couldn't afford a good enough lawyer. IIRC, SCO claimed to own parts of Linux for a very long time and they attempted to use the courts to collect a rather absurdly large amount of money that they believed they were owed. This charade continued until SCO ran out of money.

        I'd also venture a guess that it probably helps to have the protection of a corporate veil when you're being a giant litigious dick, too. A great example of this is the massive amount of court time wasted by

    • Not to be pedantic, but the burden of proof is on the accuser. At least that's how things are supposed to be in the US. The UK has gone down the batshit crazy legal rabbit hole lately so who knows. Point being, doesn't the prosecution have to prove that he didn't create bitcoin? That would mean that they know who did.

      • by pjt33 ( 739471 )

        This is part of a complicated web of litigation: Wright is the claimant in most of the parts. The UK High Court was asked to examine the evidence, declare that Wright is not Satoshi (which killed various of his lawsuits against assorted individuals and groups) and issue an injunction preventing him from continuing to claim to be Satoshi (in order to forestall the chilling effects of potential future litigation). The court found that Wright had forged all of the evidence which backed up his claim, referred h

    • by 1s44c ( 552956 )

      A two year suspended sentence for trying to defraud billions seems too light to me.

  • He should be crucified with the rest of them on the road to Rome

  • I wonder... This guy has been claiming to be Satoshi for so long that he may actually believe it. Human memory is surprisingly malleable, and people often build false memories that they genuinely believe.

<< WAIT >>

Working...