Ripple CTO Defends Craig Wright In Satoshi Trial But With A Twist

by

As a researcher with a background in law and a deep interest in the crypto space, I find the ongoing legal battle between Craig Wright and the person or entity known as COPA (Cleveans On The Side) surrounding Wright’s claims of being Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, to be an intriguing case.

In an unexpected turn of events during the ongoing legal disputes involving Craig Steven Wright, Ripple‘s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, has supported his legal team’s stance on the matter. Schwartz recently made headlines with a startling perspective on Wright’s contentious assertions that he is the mysterious creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. This new position contrasts sharply with previous statements by Schwartz, who strongly condemned Wright’s claims.

Ripple CTO On Craig Wright’s Arguments In Satoshi Trial

The dialogue started when Hodlonaut, a well-known figure in the cryptocurrency sphere, brought up an intriguing point made by Wright’s legal team on X. He expressed, “Craig Wright’s lawyers argue for his entitlement to be recognized as Satoshi and maintain that he is.” This assertion provoked various reactions, with Schwartz offering a significant response.

Schwartz acknowledged the intricacy of Wright’s arguments regarding his identity as Satoshi. The Ripple CTO expressed, “I regret to say this, but I believe they hold water. Craig’s statements about being Satoshi in discussions don’t constitute any type of speech that authorities can restrict or penalize. They aren’t fraudulent. They aren’t defamatory.”

From this viewpoint, the law makes a clear separation between careless statements and intentional deceit. Additionally, casual declarations of identity in unofficial settings typically don’t cross the line into unlawful conduct. However, it is essential to note that Schwartz’s argument came with a caveat.

As a crypto investor, I’ve been following the ongoing debate surrounding Wright’s claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto. A user recently raised concerns that if Wright sought financial gain by deceitfully impersonating Satoshi, it would constitute fraud. In response, Schwartz made it clear, “I believe that is indeed fraud.” However, despite this assertion, Schwartz continued to support the arguments put forth by Wright’s defense team.

“Schwartz pointed out that his casual claims to being Satoshi without intending to gain anything financially isn’t considered fraud. However, securing an injunction against him using such claims to acquire value would be acceptable.”

As a crypto investor, I’ve closely followed the ongoing legal battle between Ripple Labs and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The CTO of Ripple, Brad Garlinghouse, recently shared some insights into the limitations of judicial intervention in such cases. He made it clear that courts don’t have the power to determine historical facts and then prevent people from disagreeing with their conclusions. In other words, I believe he meant that courts can’t force everyone to accept their version of past events as the absolute truth.

The Ripple CTO continued, “They have the power to issue injunctions against defamation, fraud, jury tampering, and similar actions. Conversational claims don’t fit into these categories.”

Update On June 7 Hearing In COPA Vs. CSW Case

The draft order from COPA intends for me, Wright, not to initiate any legal proceedings regarding my alleged identity as Satoshi Nakamoto in any international court. However, my legal counsel, headed by Craig Orr KC, has proposed modifying “pursue” to “commence” in the order, allowing me the opportunity to defend myself if needed.

Despite COPA’s KC Hough’s concerns, this amendment might provide an opportunity for friendly parties to instigate lawsuits against Wright and revisit the Satoshi issue. On the other hand, Orr KC emphasized Wright’s right to free speech under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act, allowing him to claim the identity of Satoshi. In response, Hough KC reminded the court that it had already determined Wright had misrepresented himself as Satoshi.

The draft order does not prohibit Wright from making private claims but limits his public declarations. Additionally, COPA requires Wright to publish the court’s results on social media outlets like Twitter and Slack for half a year. They also propose reporting Wright and others to the authorities for possible criminal charges related to perceived perjury and document falsification.

Orr KC contended that the court’s rulings were already extensively disseminated, and he alleged that COPA was motivated by a desire for retribution and humiliation. He characterized COPA’s requested relief as “broad-ranging, innovative, and uncharted.”

Read More

2024-06-08 10:40