COPA just won its first hearing against Craig

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

Quote from: tadamichi on August 01, 2022, 04:59:06 PM

Quote from: franky1 on August 01, 2022, 12:33:38 PM

publication 16

Quote

The reality is, is Bitcoin is king. Like, you can do what the fuck you want with
BSV; it’s dead, it’s already dead. The market’s voted, it’s dead. If you’re going
to put your time at it, it’s dead. The price is going to die; it’s -- the only thing
keeping it afloat, is Calvin’s money; that’s literally it. Add to that, you are
supporting a bunch of people who are liars, frauds and morons. Craig Wright is
a fucking liar, and he’s a fraud; and he’s a moron; he is not Satoshi. He can come
at me in the fucking UK, he can take me to Court; he can come with his -- his
fucking billions of dollars; I don’t give a shit, come at me. Sue me, I don’t give
a fuck; you’re still a liar, you’re still a fraud, and you’re still a moron.”

Im not familiar with Uk’s defamation laws, which of these lines count as defamation exactly? Or is it because of the insults? Or doesnt it matter if what he spoke is true?

id say.
something LEGALLY dead. doesnt move. so because BSV is still wiggling and spasming its not dead dead
also yea. mccormack made an offer ('sue me') which CSW accepted such challenge

the judge did note how CSW did lie, deceive and misrepresent himself many times. so CSW did not win any "truth" judgement. it was purely that mccormack said things which might make people shy away from doing business dealing with CSW (as they should and as the comments intended) which would affect CSW financially

tadamichi

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 421

武士道

Quote from: franky1 on August 01, 2022, 12:33:38 PM

publication 16

Quote

The reality is, is Bitcoin is king. Like, you can do what the fuck you want with
BSV; it’s dead, it’s already dead. The market’s voted, it’s dead. If you’re going
to put your time at it, it’s dead. The price is going to die; it’s -- the only thing
keeping it afloat, is Calvin’s money; that’s literally it. Add to that, you are
supporting a bunch of people who are liars, frauds and morons. Craig Wright is
a fucking liar, and he’s a fraud; and he’s a moron; he is not Satoshi. He can come
at me in the fucking UK, he can take me to Court; he can come with his -- his
fucking billions of dollars; I don’t give a shit, come at me. Sue me, I don’t give
a fuck; you’re still a liar, you’re still a fraud, and you’re still a moron.”

Im not familiar with Uk’s defamation laws, which of these lines count as defamation exactly? Or is it because of the insults? Or doesnt it matter if what he spoke is true?

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18748

Quote from: bitmover on August 01, 2022, 12:07:35 PM

In the end he "won", the judge awarded Wright one British pound (US$1.23) for moral damage

franky1 summed it up nicely. McCormack is guilty of saying things which hurt CSW's feelings, so technically CSW won on that count. But since CSW is absolutely full of shit, the judge essentially told him to get lost, and awarded him the minimum possible amount in damages.

I also note this tweet from McCormack:

Quote from: https://nitter.it/PeterMcCormack/status/1554068980209369088#m

Please do note that the process is not complete and therefore I will not be commenting further on this.

Once the entire process is complete there will be others I will be thanking.

I wonder what else is still going on. I'm not a lawyer, and certainly no expert on UK law, but I hope it is one of two things: The Judge deciding that CSW should pay McCormack's legal costs for wasting his time and money with what has already been established to be outright lies, or McCormack counter-suing CSW for lying to the court.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

Quote from: bitmover on August 01, 2022, 12:07:35 PM

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on August 01, 2022, 10:21:00 AM

Not about COPA, but known scammer CSW doesn't deserve another thread about him, so I'll just add this in here.

Here is the ruling for the case between Peter McCormack and CSW: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Wright-v-McCormack-Judgment.pdf

snippits to explain the case for those that dont like clicking on pdf files

Quote

Accordingly, the identity of Satoshi is not among the issues I have to determine.
7 The only issues remaining concern:
(a) the meaning of Publication 16;
(b) liability for republication of Publication 16;
(c) whether each of the Publications caused, or was likely to cause, “serious harm to the
reputation of the claimant” within the meaning of s. 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013;
and
(d) if liability in respect of one or more of the Publications is established, relief.

publication 16

Quote

The reality is, is Bitcoin is king. Like, you can do what the fuck you want with
BSV; it’s dead, it’s already dead. The market’s voted, it’s dead. If you’re going
to put your time at it, it’s dead. The price is going to die; it’s -- the only thing
keeping it afloat, is Calvin’s money; that’s literally it. Add to that, you are
supporting a bunch of people who are liars, frauds and morons. Craig Wright is
a fucking liar, and he’s a fraud; and he’s a moron; he is not Satoshi. He can come
at me in the fucking UK, he can take me to Court; he can come with his -- his
fucking billions of dollars; I don’t give a shit, come at me. Sue me, I don’t give
a fuck; you’re still a liar, you’re still a fraud, and you’re still a moron.”

judge seen right through CSW SLAPP tactics of poking the bear to cause a debate then use the debate to cry victim and abuse the court system in his babycries

Quote

On one level, it could be said that a person who in these circumstances goads another to say
something so as to generate a basis for a defamation claim is seeking to remedy harm to his
reputation which has already been done at the time of the publication complained of. I
confess to some unease about the use of the law of defamation for that purpose. But, on the
law as it currently stands, a person who publishes something defamatory is in principle liable
if it can be shown that the publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the
claimant’s reputation, even if the publication was in response to goading.

though although mccormack was poked and goaded into calling out CSW lies. mccormack still said the things he did and so..

..verdict.
the quoted publication did cause financial loss to CSW. and so CSW was awarded..... £1 (a candy bar amount)
a fitting award to the manchild of CSW, who can take his lollipop and go away

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 6089

bitcoindata.science

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on August 01, 2022, 10:21:00 AM

Not about COPA, but known scammer CSW doesn't deserve another thread about him, so I'll just add this in here.

Here is the ruling for the case between Peter McCormack and CSW: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Wright-v-McCormack-Judgment.pdf
The case is CSW suing McCormarck for libel after McCormack repeatedly tweeted that CSW is not Satoshi. (Because we all know that suing people who say things you don't like is exactly the kind of thing we would expect the real Satoshi to do Roll Eyes

).

Turns out CSW lies. Like, a lot.

In the end he "won", the judge awarded Wright one British pound (US$1.23) for moral damage

This is very weird, and looks like an insult to faketoshi

https://br.financas.yahoo.com/news/craig-wright-v-peter-mccormack-122610574.html

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18748

Not about COPA, but known scammer CSW doesn't deserve another thread about him, so I'll just add this in here.

Here is the ruling for the case between Peter McCormack and CSW: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Wright-v-McCormack-Judgment.pdf
The case is CSW suing McCormarck for libel after McCormack repeatedly tweeted that CSW is not Satoshi. (Because we all know that suing people who say things you don't like is exactly the kind of thing we would expect the real Satoshi to do Roll Eyes

).

Turns out CSW lies. Like, a lot.

Quote from: Paragraph 92

In any event, there is no doubt at all about what Dr Wright was saying in para. 41 of his first witness statement – and he now accepts that this was incorrect.

Quote from: Paragraph 94

Dr Wright now accepts that his evidence (though not his pleading) was wrong, but says that this was inadvertent.

Quote from: Paragraph 95

It is striking that, with the assistance of his very well-resourced lawyers, he has been unable to locate any documentary evidence to support his account that invitations were made and then rescinded

Quote from: Paragraph 96

There was no documentary evidence of this. In any event, it is not what he had said in his Re-Amended Particulars of Claim or evidence and, if true, is contrary to the case originally advanced

Quote from: Paragraph 97

Dr Nguyen’s evidence strongly suggests the falsity of Dr Wright’s new case that he had received an informal invitation from her.

Quote from: Paragraph 98

Again, however, this is flatly inconsistent with his original case.

I'll stop quoting at that point because it goes on and on for several more pages documenting all his lies. The judge summarizes with these two paragraphs though:

Quote from: Paragraph 111

I therefore conclude that Dr Wright’s original case on serious harm, and the evidence supporting it, both of which were maintained until days before trial, were deliberately false.

Quote from: Paragraph 143

Had it not been for Dr Wright’s deliberately false case as to serious harm, a more than minimal award of damages would have been appropriate, though the quantum would have been reduced to reflect the fact that Mr McCormack was goaded into making the statements he did and, having found Dr Wright not to be a witness of truth, I would have rejected in its entirety his case as to the distress he claims to have suffered.

So another waste of everybody's time and money to reach the conclusion that we've all known for years: CSW is full of shit.

larry_vw_1955

sr. member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 469

craig wright just keep making the news for all the wrong reasons... Angry

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18748

Here is a link to the ruling: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/667.html

Some very interesting/amusing quotes:

Quote

It is uncontroversial that a fundamental feature of the Networks, at least in their existing form, is that digital assets are transferred through the use of private keys. TTL effectively seeks to bypass that. There must be a real risk that acceding to TTL's demands would not be consistent with a duty of single-minded loyalty owed to other users.

Quote

The fact that the BSV Network may be preparing to make a system change to accommodate loss of access to private keys (see [22] above) does not mean that any such change, whether a general one or specific to TTL, can be imposed on others.

Judge openly stating that Wright is seeking to destroy bitcoin for his own ego, just like he is about to destroy what little is left of BSV. What a joke.

Quote

TTL also claims that the Defendants are in breach of a duty of care by failing to include in the software means to allow those who have lost their private keys or had them stolen to access their bitcoin, failing to include sufficient safeguards against wrongdoing by third parties, and failing to take steps to give TTL access and/or control or otherwise protect TTL against fraud or allow it to seek to put right any fraud that occurs in the future.

That certainly sounds like something Satoshi would say, doesn't it? I'm taking you to court because the software I myself wrote about a decentralized currency doesn't include some centralized mechanism to hand out other people's coins. Roll Eyes

Quote

A further point to keep in mind in this case is that any loss suffered by TTL is properly characterised as purely economic. (TTL made written submissions to the contrary but Mr Wardell rightly did not pursue them orally.)

Sounds like CSW is firing off absolute bullshit in his statements despite best advice from his legal team, who are then forced to try to defend his absolute bullshit (or completely ignore it, as in this case). Pretty sure the lawyers know they won't win this, but the money is too good to pass on.

aoluain

legendary

Activity: 2436

Merit: 1362

Its obvious from the article that

a.) Judge Sarah Falk of the London High Court was well versed in Bitcoin, its development
and operations

and

b.) Judge Falk can see through the very thin cloak over CSW's lies and trickery

Quote

“It is very hard to see how TTL’s case on fiduciary duty is seriously arguable,”

Quote

...Such a claim, she wrote, was not “realistically arguable.”

I love to see this language being used by someone in authority, this ruling is
another thread unraveling from CSW's web of lies, soon there will be nothing left
to support him.

mynonce

full member

Activity: 233

Merit: 253

Bitcoin Developers Do Not Have a Fiduciary Duty to Bitcoin Owners, Judge Rules
https://blockworks.co/bitcoin-developers-do-not-have-a-fiduciary-duty-to-bitcoin-owners-judge-rules/

London High Court rejects a claim that developers must help access bitcoins from allegedly lost private keys.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18748

Quote from: Mbitr on February 11, 2022, 06:05:24 AM

Judge seemed thoroughly fed up

Completely. Although I can't help but feel he's missed the point on something:

Quote from: odolvlobo on February 11, 2022, 04:49:05 PM

That is a separate and unrelated case.

Sure, but it's still litigation involving CSW. One thread about this identity thief in Bitcoin Discussion is more than enough.

odolvlobo

legendary

Activity: 4466

Merit: 3391

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on January 10, 2022, 04:25:16 AM

Another update in the case is viewable here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BLkVxG1wtvzEQeByFGUFYfzWTkvihqie/

The TL;DR is that devs have won a ruling which states that CSW must pay a security deposit to cover their legal costs up front, since the judge ruled she has "reason to believe" that CSW "will be unable to pay the defendants’ costs if ordered to do so."

That is a separate and unrelated case.

There are currently several cases involving CSW:

1. COPA is suing CSW, forcing him to prove his claims of being Satoshi.
2. CSW is suing various people for defamation.
3. CSW is suing developers, forcing them to modify code to allow transfer of BTC, BCH, and BSV to him without having the private keys.

This topic is about #1. Other cases should be moved to other topics.

Mbitr

legendary

Activity: 2086

Merit: 1321

Bitcoin needs you!

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on February 11, 2022, 05:23:41 AM

Here you go: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/242.html

It's not as clear cut as that, though: COPA were claiming for £120,000, while the judge awarded them £70,000, due mainly to discrepancies in the number of hours they claim have been spent on the case by various lawyers.

Thanks for that

An interesting read actually - nothing about the case as such - more about the fact that the Lawyers/Solicitors are making a fortune out of the case - no change there

Judge seemed thoroughly fed up

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18748

Here you go: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2022/242.html

It's not as clear cut as that, though: COPA were claiming for £120,000, while the judge awarded them £70,000, due mainly to discrepancies in the number of hours they claim have been spent on the case by various lawyers.

Mbitr

legendary

Activity: 2086

Merit: 1321

Bitcoin needs you!

CSW has to pay £70,000 to COPA in legal costs by February 22nd

Anyone got any more information or any links to the actual hearing where this was awarded?
(Can’t find it at the mo )

https://coingeek.com/judge-calls-copa-claimed-legal-costs-excessive-reduces-award-by-33/

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18748

Quote from: leea-1334 on January 13, 2022, 07:22:45 AM

Was there not a fund also set up for Cobra previously,,, did that money get put to use?

There was a thread created by LFC_Bitcoin here (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/donate-to-cobra-pending-court-battle-against-craig-wright-5332996) appealing for donations, but I do not believe there was formal fund set up. Although it seems Cøbra did seek out legal advice, he never actually went to court since by doing so he would have to reveal his real identity, and it was clear that whole court case was just a ploy by CSW to try to obtain that information and use it to attack and hurt Cøbra. I'm therefore not sure what legal fees, if any, he sustained.

This current case is different since the developers have been named and will likely have significant expenses in defending themselves from these sham accusations.

Quote from: leea-1334 on January 13, 2022, 07:22:45 AM

I would happily contribute a week signature earning to such a cause. We are little people but we know what is right.

Great attitude to have! The email from Dorsey says they are not looking for donations at the moment. A quick web search puts Dorsey's net worth at somewhere between $8 and $15 billion, depending on the source, so if he is bank rolling this himself then he should have things covered for a while.

leea-1334

hero member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 953

Temporary forum vacation

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on January 12, 2022, 04:40:45 AM

So Jack Dorsey is starting an organization to provide funding for the legal defense of the developers, starting with this current case. I'm not sure how that fits with the ruling I posted above that CSW will have to pay a deposit up front to cover their legal costs, but it's a welcome development nonetheless.

Thank you for the explanation,,, I must admit when I read it I did not realize it was this serious. You are right that even if he has access it is meaningless but it is the principle of giving in to one mad man, then any numbers of madmen can do this in the future.

Was there not a fund also set up for Cobra previously,,, did that money get put to use? I would happily contribute a week signature earning to such a cause. We are little people but we know what is right.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

Quote from: DooMAD on January 12, 2022, 03:15:51 AM

Quote from: franky1 on January 11, 2022, 08:40:53 PM

where by he takes his time making nonsense case updates asking for silly alterations or exemptions to delay things. challenging the wording of the other sides responses. and other silly things

And I can personally attest that franky1 is the forum's foremost expert on utilising that tactic. He knows what he's talking about. Faketoshi would be proud.

boring poke. bear didnt bite. it just yawned. not even the kardashians would be proud of your social drama attempts.
you are just not that important for people to care about your personal thoughts outside your friend group.
..
funnily enough DooMAD has actually attempted this trick multiple times first, which intrigued me to learn more about tactics of people like DooMAD and faketoshi.. funnier part is that DooMAD and faketoshi dont like it when their tactics are reversed on them..

.. may the bitcoin defence fund continue to annoy faketoshi, even use faketoshi's tactics against him. or just out his tactics publicly for all to see.
such as getting him to admit that the 2016 'signature reveal' was actually a publicly available 2009 signature unrelated to messages faketoshi made (yep he finally admitted it in court records)

mynonce

full member

Activity: 233

Merit: 253

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on January 12, 2022, 04:40:45 AM

In another update to the proceedings, this just came through on the bitcoin-dev mailing list: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-January/019741.html

Just posted for bitcointalk folks, if they want to ask that question:

@esiattorney
Where can more volunteer and part-time lawyers sign up?

@UltraRat3
Same question. Happy to assist.

@jack answered: (source: https://twitter.com/jack/status/1481242677236707329)
Email address at end of note is best place to start

(info at bitcoindefensefund.org)

aysg76

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 2124

He is top fraudster among all of them and end up with all his net worth also being consumed in these legal hearings but what he is expecting will never happen because he is not the owner of those million coins and we all know the fact.

The same thing is biggest proof is the keys to prove the ownership and he can't even sign a message from that address and still believes that we would believe him? The clown has few audience like him but won't be entertaining them long so it's best to watch what stupidity he comes up with next.There was one such thread in which i mentioned about faketoshi CSW through a meme to the community and here it is :

Quote from: aysg76 on December 26, 2021, 07:46:37 AM

Made me laugh hard Grin

To all the faketoshis in the market this technique is worth trying but still it won't help you.

Have a look at full thread here : Faketoshi

We all need to help COPA in matching up the legal expenses to expose this fraudster to the whole public and tell that he can't manipulate the court of law even with money power because the Bitcoin doesn't care at all and that's why decentralisation has taken place.Let him try his best but in the end he is working to prove himself the real clown.

Topic: COPA just won its first hearing against Craig (Read 1090 times)