The “creators” of Bitcoin have appeared from time to time since the creation of the first cryptocurrency. Some of them were bared immediately, but others caused waves and storms in the ecosystem. Craig Wright is among them. How did this person become the title of “Nakamoto” and what are his rights to Bitcoin based on?
The story of the new Satoshi Nakamoto started in September 2015. That time two publications, Wired and Gizmodo, published the investigations on Craig Wright.
Note, that Wright’s blog temporarily became unavailable after these publications while some of the posts edited.
In October, letters were sent from [email protected] including the text:
“I’m not Craig Wright. We are all Satoshi.”
The same unknown sender sent out contacts during the story with Dorian Nakamoto, who was also considered a Bitcoin creator.
Members of the Bitcoin Foundation – John Matonis and Gavin Andersen confirmed this statement after a meeting with Wright. Matonis, in particular, published an article which stated that Craig signed a transaction with the key from the genesis block of Bitcoin.
On May 3, the self-proclaimed Satoshi wrote a post on his blog to prove his identity. Wright promised to provide verification documents as evidence and conduct a transaction using one of the first Bitcoin addresses with 1,000,000 BTC. By the way, it was then that the expert first spoke about the Tulip Trust, which runs the Nakamoto BTC.
Since some time, Wright deleted all old blog records on October 5 and posted an apologizing post.
It would be seemed the pretentious businessman decided to give up sound statements and quietly leave for himself to earn money, but no. According to Reuters, Wright’s offshore company EITC Holdings Ltd filed more than 50 patent apps to register rights to Bitcoin, blockchain and other technical solutions related to cryptocurrency in June.
The result is modest, but it was from Craig Wright’s patent applications (and not from real evidence) that his formation as Satoshi Nakamoto began. Although at this point, the community was already skeptical about the claims of an Australian businessman.
The real conflict between Wright and the crypto community began in 2018 when he promoted Bitcoin SV actively.
First, Jihan Wu, the head of Bitmain, accused Wright of being a Blockstream agent, and the main task of the odious businessman was to discredit Gavin. Wu also criticized Wright’s idea of adding opcodes to Bitcoin Cash. Since the accusations were not substantiated by anything, the case ended up in a skirmish on Twitter.
But lawsuits went further. It is known about Wright’s three “high-profile” lawsuits against members of the community:
The Supreme Court refused to be tried by Ver and Hodlonaut due to insufficient grounds in the jurisdiction, but Hodlonaut activated his account two months later and sued Wright in Norway. Actually, the dispute should be settled there.
However, the publication of personal data and Craig’s attitude to critics caused a flurry of indignation not only among ordinary users but also among major industry players. So, in response to Wright’s lawsuits, Binance and Kraken announced the delisting of Bitcoin SV.
On February 28, 2018, Ira Kleiman, the brother of Dave Kleiman, mentioned by Gizmodo as a co-author of Bitcoin, filed a lawsuit against Wright to recover half of the Bitcoins that Craig Wright allegedly owned (account for 1.1 million BTC).
This argument would have put an end to the Craig Wars. If Wright sent 500,000 BTC to Kleiman from the first addresses, then there would be no questions about his identity.
Kleiman filed a lawsuit, without even arguing with Wright’s claims about his authorship of Bitcoin, and the court accepted this as an axiom without requiring evidence. Providing information about Bitcoin addresses was necessary to determine the amount of recovery, and not to confirm authorship.
Back in 2018, WizSec investigated the addresses belonging to supposedly Kleiman and Wright were, in fact, the internal accounts of the Mt.Gox crypto exchange. But no one paid attention to that.
During the dispute, Craig was unable to provide significant evidence of Bitcoin’s authorship and was caught several times on the falsification of correspondence and electronic documents.
The paradox is that the alleged author of Bitcoin is arguing with the relatives of the same ghostly co-author (who is not alive) about who owes how much money. The parties simply acknowledged the existence of each other, not paying attention to the opinion of the rest of the community.
Note, that Craig has not provided any significant evidence of his authorship of Bitcoin, but he successfully promoted Bitcoin Cash, and then his own project – BSV, essentially selling this very Bitcoin in a new “improved” wrapper, without drugs, Silk Road and child pornography.
We are not hinting at anything, but it seems that the reputation, albeit dubious, but the creator of Bitcoin, can become a powerful marketing tool. The main thing is to maintain your fame in the industry, and hype will do its job.