Key Takeaways:
- Judge James Mellor issued a global freezing order on ÂŁ6 million of Craig Wright’s assets.
- In a lawsuit filed by COPA, Mellor determined Wright was not Satoshi Nakamoto
A recent ruling by a UK judge has garnered attention in the cryptocurrency community as Craig Wright, a controversial figure claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin, faces legal ramifications.Â
The judge issued a worldwide freezing order on £6 million of Wright’s assets to prevent him from moving them offshore, following a court decision that dismissed his claims as the creator of Bitcoin.
The decision, delivered by Judge James Mellor, stems from a lawsuit brought by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) against Wright. In a landmark ruling on March 14, Judge Mellor concluded that Wright could not be identified as Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, and therefore could not claim authorship of the Bitcoin white paper or original software versions.
Wright’s attempt to transfer shares of his company, RCJBR Holding, to a Singapore-based entity, DeMorgan, raised concerns about potential asset evasion.
Judge Mellor highlighted these concerns, emphasizing the risk of Wright avoiding financial obligations related to the lawsuit.
The judgment further revealed the significant costs incurred by COPA, estimated at approximately ÂŁ6.7 million.
Wright’s alleged deception, including the fabrication of biographical history and forged documents, was also underscored during the trial, painting a picture of falsehoods on an “extraordinary scale.“
Moreover, recent investigations suggest that Satoshi Nakamoto may not be an individual but rather a collective entity, casting further doubt on Wright’s claims.
Judge Mellor’s decision to freeze Wright’s assets reflects concerns about his history of defaulting on orders for payment and the potential dissipation of funds.
The ruling underscores the legal battles surrounding Wright’s assertion of being Satoshi Nakamoto, shedding light on the complexities and controversies within the cryptocurrency space.
As the legal saga continues, the case raises broader questions about the identity of Bitcoin’s creator and the accountability of individuals making bold claims within the crypto community.
