Plaintiff Claims Document Date Forgery in Craig Wright v. COPA Trial
During the second day of the Craig Wright v. COPA trial, the plaintiff alleged that Wright had forged the date on his document claiming to be Bitcoin’s creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. The document, shown in a video by Wright in 2019, has a date stamp from 2008, predating the Bitcoin whitepaper. COPA pointed out visual discrepancies in the document’s date, suggesting possible alteration or forgery. Wright admitted to the discrepancies but maintained the document’s authenticity, stating he had possessed it for a long time and couldn’t recall its origin.
Expert Finds Alignment Issues and Differences in Footers
COPA presented findings from an expert who compared the document to versions found online. The expert noted alignment issues and differences in footers compared to those typical of 2008. Wright disputed these findings, citing database format variability as a reason for the discrepancies. He also dismissed claims that COPA’s expert had found the original document, suggesting it was part of an effort to discredit him.
Legal Battle Continues with Testimony and Cross-Examination
The trial is set to continue with further testimony and cross-examination. Both parties are prepared for a lengthy legal battle as the proceedings are expected to last several weeks. The dispute began in 2016 when Craig Wright claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto and asserted intellectual property rights over Bitcoin. COPA filed a lawsuit seeking a court declaration that the Bitcoin whitepaper is public domain material and that no individual holds copyright claims over it or the name ‘Bitcoin’.
Hot Take: COPA Challenges Wright’s Document Authenticity
In the ongoing Craig Wright v. COPA trial, the authenticity of Wright’s document claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto is being challenged. COPA has raised concerns about the date forgery, pointing out visual discrepancies in the document’s date stamp. An expert hired by COPA found alignment issues and differences in footers, suggesting possible alterations. Wright maintains the document’s authenticity but acknowledges the visual discrepancies. The trial is expected to continue for several weeks, with both parties prepared for a lengthy legal battle. This case is significant as it aims to determine the copyright claims over the Bitcoin whitepaper and the ‘Bitcoin’ name.
By
By
By
By