If someone asked me what I would like more for a New Year's gift, Faketoshi in prison or a new $100k ATH, I would definitely choose this first - some things are worth more than any money. A few days ago I just wrote that I would like someone to oppose this lying bastard, and this is really great news for the end of the year. I know he won't go to jail (for now), but maybe this is the first step in that direction.
We know that Faketoshi will never be able to sign messages from addresses that he claims are his, because someone did it some time ago and without a doubt showed who is lying and who is telling the truth.
If you haven't read to the end, as far as I understand we Faketoshi complained because his title of doctor (which for some is controversial) is not included in the final text of the conclusion. Kudos to the judge for refusing to change documents just to make CW a doctor - so not only did he lose this battle, but he was left without a doctorate
In the suggestions for correction sent to me after I circulated my draft judgment, the defendant's team told me that the defendant requested that the title of my judgment be amended so that the defendant's name include his university degree of doctor. They referred me to CPR PD 16, paragraph 2.6(a), which states that the claim form must include "the full name of each party". This is defined to mean, in the case of an individual, "his full unabbreviated name and title by which he is known".
In fact, the claim form sued the defendant using his full names, but not the degree of "doctor". I note that each statement of case from the claimant's side thereafter has omitted any reference to the claimant's university doctorate, whereas each statement of case from the defendant's side has included it. For what it may be worth, however, my view is that paragraph 2.6(a) of PD 16 in referring to "title" means social title, and not any other style, office or rank, such as professional, military or academic.
Be that as it may, the claim was begun against the defendant under his full names, no application has ever been made to the court to alter the intitulement of the action, no argument has taken place on the point, and no authorities have been referred to. The point has been sprung on the court at the last minute. Dr Wright is justly proud of his academic achievement, but I do not think the court should be dealing with this minor dispute at this very late stage and on such an inadequate basis. I mean no disrespect to Dr Wright by not doing so.
