12 reasons why Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto, according to COPA


Shortly after the trial between the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) and businessman Craig Wright is finally over, the alliance of bitcoin defenders (BTC) outlined 12 key reasons why, they claim, the Australian is not Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of BTC, as he has called himself for several years.

The first reason is the Bitcoin White Paper. COPA argues that this whitepaper was initially written on the OpenOffice platform and not LaTex, as Wright stated throughout the trial. “The real Satoshi would know,” says the alliance, recalling that “faketoshi” has tried in vain to support his argument “with false documents.”

The second reason is the email exchange that the real Nakamoto had with cryptographer Adam Back. They assure from COPA that Back “did not disdain the concept of Bitcoin in August 2008 and did not say that it would fail.” Instead, Wright insists otherwise, “but his story has been proven false by Adam Back’s own emails.”

As reported by CriptoNoticias, Back revealed never-before-seen emails between him and the real Satoshi Nakamoto. It was a conversation held months before the official launch of Bitcoin, on January 3, 2009.

COPA’s third reason for ensuring that Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto is the influence of the work of cryptographer Wei Dai on the work of the true creator of Bitcoin.

As defenders of Nakamoto’s legacy allege, the idealist behind BTC discovered Wei Dai’s “b-money” proposal in August 2008, as demonstrated in the emails sent to Adam Back. But Wright says he was “captivated by Wei Dai’s work since the late 1990s,” COPA indicates.

Satoshi’s PGP key, meanwhile, is the fourth reason why COPA claims that Wright is not the creator of Bitcoin. They remember that the real Nakamoto knew that the public encryption key had been created, published and used before 2011; and that its main function was as a signing key. Instead, “Dr. Wright’s various inconsistent accounts of the PGP key only demonstrate that he is not the person who generated it,” COPA says.

Wright has insisted that he created Bitcoin, but COPA shows that he did not. Source: X.

The fifth reason is the Bitcoin code, says COPA. The real Satoshi Nakamoto, as the creator of the protocol, knew that one of the functions, called CheckBlockHeader, did not exist until 2013. However, Wright showed at trial that he knew absolutely nothing about thataccording to the lawyers.

The sixth reason that COPA presents to affirm that Wright is not Satoshi is the Upload.ae site. They allege that the real Nakamoto knew that the Bitcoin whitepaper That free file hosting service was made available operated from Dubai. However, remember that Wright states that the document was uploaded to a secondary server operated by him from Melbourne, Australia.

Following the arguments, COPA establishes the well-known “patch Tuesday” as the seventh reason why Wright is not Satoshi. The event when Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle and other companies periodically release software patches.

Wright did not mine bitcoin in 2009

Lawyers claim the real Nakamoto knew the Bitcoin protocol did not crash as a result of patches issued by Microsoft in October 2009. Instead, Wright delivered a “series of false stories” about it, showing “that he is not Satoshi.”

As an eighth reason, COPA lawyers recall the requirements for Bitcoin mining. They claim that the real Satoshi Nakamoto knew that the first operations of the system “did not require more than 70 computers nor did they cost USD 11,000 per month to operate due to electricity issues.”

“Dr. Wright’s account of his mining operations in 2009 only reveals that he is not Satoshi and that he was not mining at that time,” they say from COPA.

The ninth reason is Bitcoin transactions. Defenders say the real Satoshi knew that, contrary to Wright’s claims, Nakamoto did not send BTC to user Zooko Wilcox-O’Hearn.

“Furthermore, the real Satoshi could correctly name a person he transferred BTC to, in addition to the few publicly known names, for example Nick Bohm, whose name was not public. And if, as Dr. Wright claimed, Satoshi had sent BTC to a hundred people who did not yet know each other, then the real Satoshi would have been able to name at least one of them,” COPA lawyers say.

The tenth reason why COPA claims that Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto is the genesis block of Bitcoin. They assure that the true creator of the protocol would not have made the “serious and obvious mistake of stating that there is no public key associated with the transaction for the genesis block.” However, they point out, “that is the mistake Dr. Wright made in his statements.”

The eleventh reason that COPA expresses for rejecting Wright’s allegations is the publication that Satoshi made in July 2010 about cryptocurrencies. The lawyers comment that the true creator of Bitcoin wrote such a publication on that date and that he would not have insisted otherwise, “as Wright did.”

And COPA’s final reason for claiming that Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto is the transfer to the GitHub site. They allege that the true creator of Bitcoin did not object to software developer Gavin Andresen using GitHub instead of SourceForge in connection with the Bitcoin protocol.

“Satoshi would also have known that Vladimir van der Laan (one of the big developers of Bitcoin) had nothing to do with the transfer, and that there was not a shred of evidence to suggest that he had done so. Dr. Wright’s false accounts on these points point him out as if he were not Satoshi,” COPA maintains.

Bitcoin defenders in the trial against Craig Wright point out that now, with all the evidence shared before the judge, “it is clearer than ever and beyond any doubt, that Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto.”

Now we have to wait for the judge’s deliberations regarding the diatribe that has been going on for several years. And from this, COPA intends to not allow Wright to continue harming the ecosystem, so now the alliance calls for jail for self-proclaimed Satoshi Nakamoto

As CriptoNoticias reported on Wednesday, March 13, COPA lawyers want to bring the case to the Public Ministry to accuse Wright of perjury and perversion of the course of justice. Crimes that could cost the Australian businessman jail, who for years insisted on his version, even to the detriment of Bitcoin developers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *