easy fix
cobra is just a random pseudonym, no one knows the identity of
let one of the lawyers of cobra become the named party making a dispute of costs.
hire a homeless guy to be cobra for a day
EG there can be more then one cobra or no cobra at all. or everyone is cobra
change ownership of bitcoin.org to be now owned by cabro
(if SBF can swap CEO of an entity.. within a day.. so could cobra. put it into lawyers name temporarily to give lawyer power of attorney over "business dealings")
Topic: Satoshi’s Bitcoin whitepaper to be removed from Bitcoin.org? (Read 408 times)
<...> pay at least £35,000 ($48,600) in legal costs <...>
I thought that the ruling was kind of the end of the cases as is (was), but there must still be some trailing aspects going on behind the scenes in relation to the payment of the legal costs. Now, over a year later, the below linked article states that the High Court in London recently ruled that Cøbra needs to dox himself if he is to contest the payment of the legal costs he was condemned to pay in the 2021 sentence.As far as I can see, Cøbra would need to reveal his identity (were he to contest the fees) because the defendants need to:
Quote
<…> identify themselves in the manner indicated in the application notice.
It therefore seems that the self-doxing is derived from the need to provide his identity on a form, with no way around it.The judge does point out though that:
Quote
<…> should Cøbra not wish to unmask themselves, they can request anonymization. That, however, will not prevent the claimant from learning their name.
I figure that above means that there is a chance to anonymize information to outsiders (i.e. publicly published appeal results is my guess), though not to their opponents (Craig & Co.), which would have no trouble in making it public somehow I figure.See: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/11/25/bitcoinorgs-cobra-must-unmask-to-challenge-craig-wrights-legal-costs-uk-court-rules/
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
Another attempt to double or tripple FUD.Craig Wright is not and will never be recognized as Bitcoin founder. Never. He was detected by many plagiarism attempts. It makes sense to wipe out any attempt from him or any governments that support Craig Wright.
Craig Wright Accused of Plagiarism Again. Cointelegraph is a shit online newspaper but you can dig more to find more researches about Craig Wright plagiarism.
Its crazy though that this Judge recognises e copyright of the whitepaper.
How did this Judge land at his decision? has he not done any research to back up
his claims of being Satoshi. TBH it just doesnt make any sense how Wright has got
so far with his "quest"
I think Cobra didn't defend himself so it is like winning by default. But it is indeed a sad day for us. For all crypto enthusiasts, we all know that CSW is a fake one and not the real author of that whitepaper. But unfortunately, this winning may lead to confusion especially for newcomers in crypto. I hope they will educate themselves and know the real identity of CSW. I just hope, he would stop spreading more lies to the public.
Since when was the whitepaper intellectual property? This judgement is beyond absurd.
Totally absurd. Faketoshi Wankamoto and a UK court. LOL
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
Another attempt to double or tripple FUD.Craig Wright is not and will never be recognized as Bitcoin founder. Never. He was detected by many plagiarism attempts. It makes sense to wipe out any attempt from him or any governments that support Craig Wright.
Craig Wright Accused of Plagiarism Again. Cointelegraph is a shit online newspaper but you can dig more to find more researches about Craig Wright plagiarism.
Its crazy though that this Judge recognises e copyright of the whitepaper.
How did this Judge land at his decision? has he not done any research to back up
his claims of being Satoshi. TBH it just doesnt make any sense how Wright has got
so far with his "quest"
whereby the 'new owner' is not bound by the court order. and where the new 'ownership' updates every month.. meaning CSW has to re-file every time 'ownership' changes
Doesn't work like that, unfortunately. Once there is a final decision of the court against an infringement that caries weight no matter how many owners the website will change, the target is the paper and (if specified) the website, not the individual, the new owner will be only served an infringement claim by CSW lawyers and unless they will want to go to court and battle over the ownership of the bitcoin paper they will have to obey and remove it.
Sucks, it leads to situations where you're the owner of a new business and you realize that you must give up your name and brand as the previous owner hasn't informed you about everything, but that's what we have here. Imagine how torrent and filesharing websites would have tried to use this loophole if it actually existed.
There is only one way to settle those things once and for all, and it's what COPA is trying.
just wondering if there are legal loopholes
EG if court order is that "COBRA" cannot display it on his website bitcoin.org
what if a cough cough randomly created pseudonym cough.. took over ownership of bitcoin.org
(not revealing the human name behind a just thought up creation)
whereby the 'new owner' is not bound by the court order. and where the new 'ownership' updates every month.. meaning CSW has to re-file every time 'ownership' changes
imagine it
next week its owned by venomousworm.
next month its owned by hissyhissywigglything
following month owned by sliverslivernolegs
Quote
IF ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO IS A DEFENDANT DISOBEYS THIS ORDER THAT INDIVIDUAL
MAY BE HELD TO BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY A FINE,
IMPRISONMENT, CONFISCATION OF ASSETS OR OTHER PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW
IF ANY A COMPANY OR OTHER ORGANISATION WHICH IS A DEFENDANT DISOBEYS
THIS ORDER THAT COMPANY OR ORGANISATION MAY BE HELD TO BE IN CONTEMPT
OF COURT AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY A FINE, CONFISCATION OF ASSETS OR OTHER
PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW. ANY DIRECTOR OR OFFICER OF THAT COMPANY OR
ORGANISATION MAY ALSO BE PUNISHED BY A FINE, IMPRISONMENT, CONFISCATION
OF ASSETS OR OTHER PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW
MAY BE HELD TO BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY A FINE,
IMPRISONMENT, CONFISCATION OF ASSETS OR OTHER PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW
IF ANY A COMPANY OR OTHER ORGANISATION WHICH IS A DEFENDANT DISOBEYS
THIS ORDER THAT COMPANY OR ORGANISATION MAY BE HELD TO BE IN CONTEMPT
OF COURT AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY A FINE, CONFISCATION OF ASSETS OR OTHER
PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW. ANY DIRECTOR OR OFFICER OF THAT COMPANY OR
ORGANISATION MAY ALSO BE PUNISHED BY A FINE, IMPRISONMENT, CONFISCATION
OF ASSETS OR OTHER PUNISHMENT UNDER THE LAW
EG if court order is that "COBRA" cannot display it on his website bitcoin.org
what if a cough cough randomly created pseudonym cough.. took over ownership of bitcoin.org
(not revealing the human name behind a just thought up creation)
whereby the 'new owner' is not bound by the court order. and where the new 'ownership' updates every month.. meaning CSW has to re-file every time 'ownership' changes
imagine it
next week its owned by venomousworm.
next month its owned by hissyhissywigglything
following month owned by sliverslivernolegs
Like Cobra said, all the more reason to prove why Bitcoin is needed. I can't believe that clown is still forcing himself upon the community. Worse, I can't believe he actually has droves of supporters still crazy enough to fall for him.
Then again, I've seen enough of this world to know I should believe all that is happening.
Actually great that Cøbra lost this case because that means that his points about why we need bitcoin more than ever. Although it's a sad day for bitcoin with the whitepaper being taken down. The real problem in the case of people still believing in something like this is that people aren't informed and they are afraid of the truth so they want someone that can tell them sweet lies. Then again, I've seen enough of this world to know I should believe all that is happening.
Cobra is Satoshi? 🤔
no, we all know theymos is Satoshi 
Cobra is Satoshi? 🤔
no the court didn't accept he is Satoshi Nakamoto. the scammer went to court and made a claim, the court set a date and asked the other party (cobra) to attend. they didn't attend so automatically the court ruled in favor of the scammer.
Cobra did attendHe is really trying hard to avoid the consequences if any after he exposes the identity. May be this itself is proof that he is Satoshi? How could the court be so dumb to proclaim a unstable and too baffling person to rule a favour of the court? That's really a underrated judgement by the jury. Or may be they were simply too ignorant and had under the table thingie going on. In any case Cobra is so stubborn that they are willing to pay that huge amount just to hide the identity. That's like a real man!
No one has ever insinuated Cobra is Satoshi. Privacy is important to loads of people, for various reasons.I suggest for you to start doing some research on the judicial system in UK instead of undermining their integrity.
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
no the court didn't accept he is Satoshi Nakamoto. the scammer went to court and made a claim, the court set a date and asked the other party (cobra) to attend. they didn't attend so automatically the court ruled in favor of the scammer.
this only means that cobra wanted to protect their privacy and didn't want to give the scammer the satisfaction of doxing them.
He is really trying hard to avoid the consequences if any after he exposes the identity. May be this itself is proof that he is Satoshi? How could the court be so dumb to proclaim a unstable and too baffling person to rule a favour of the court? That's really a underrated judgement by the jury. Or may be they were simply too ignorant and had under the table thingie going on. In any case Cobra is so stubborn that they are willing to pay that huge amount just to hide the identity. That's like a real man!
It would take only 5k S19pro or M30+ to finally get rid of that shitcoin sv fork.....just saying 
Even if the UK was still in the EU it wouldn't have mattered as a rule by default wouldn't have carried effects in other states jurisdiction, nor normally should that lead to any ISP accepting that request. If an ISP refuses to block access Faketoshi would have to file a copyright claim them and if this time the ISP does send its lawyers the judge will have to verify Faketoshi claims of his copyright infringement, which of course he wouldn't be able to provide.
This whole thing went wrong in the first place, much like the censorship on youtube, someone makes a claim, you don't make a counter you lose, doesn't matter if the other guy is a liar, you showed no willingness to defend yourself. Well, that sucks...but that is his decision, that's how things stand right now.
The jurisdiction shouldn't extend to the rest of EU, after brexit AFAIK. UK can instruct their ISPs to selectively redirect traffic directed to that website to their own to enforce censorship like what they've done before.
Even if the UK was still in the EU it wouldn't have mattered as a rule by default wouldn't have carried effects in other states jurisdiction, nor normally should that lead to any ISP accepting that request. If an ISP refuses to block access Faketoshi would have to file a copyright claim them and if this time the ISP does send its lawyers the judge will have to verify Faketoshi claims of his copyright infringement, which of course he wouldn't be able to provide.
This whole thing went wrong in the first place, much like the censorship on youtube, someone makes a claim, you don't make a counter you lose, doesn't matter if the other guy is a liar, you showed no willingness to defend yourself. Well, that sucks...but that is his decision, that's how things stand right now.
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
no the court didn't accept he is Satoshi Nakamoto. the scammer went to court and made a claim, the court set a date and asked the other party (cobra) to attend. they didn't attend so automatically the court ruled in favor of the scammer.
this only means that cobra wanted to protect their privacy and didn't want to give the scammer the satisfaction of doxing them.
The court didn't accept the claim that he was Satoshi afaik. Cobra didn't defend himself so CSW won the court case by default since Cobra didn't want to reveal his identity from what I understood. Now what's confusing is did the court accept the side of CSW about his claim being Satoshi and writing the white paper, or did the court just, well, defaulted and didn't really bother identifying whether his sides' claims were true or not. Though it seems to be saying that CSW owns the paper just based on the decision they made since I don't think a punishment would've been handed out if the court didn't agree with CSW (Correct me if I'm wrong, idk much about court cases)
The section of default ruling: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part12As Cobra chose to not compromise his privacy (by filing an opposition or through a legal representative), the court reached the default ruling. This doesn't mean that CSW's claims were valid, it is just that they weren't (able to be) disputed in the court so there isn't any meaning to that. From what I understand, there was a written defense by Cobra (?) but it didn't matter.
Like Cobra said, all the more reason to prove why Bitcoin is needed. I can't believe that clown is still forcing himself upon the community. Worse, I can't believe he actually has droves of supporters still crazy enough to fall for him.
Then again, I've seen enough of this world to know I should believe all that is happening.
Then again, I've seen enough of this world to know I should believe all that is happening.
If he wins this case, he is legally recognized as Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin.
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
I'm defenately not a lawyer (far from it), but as far as i understand, it was a UK court making a UK decission that should not impact anybody not doing business/living in the UK...
I'm not even sure the UK can force Cøbra to reject UK visitors....
In my country, the pirate bay was banned... What they had to do is force ISP's to change their DNS so the pirate bay domain name would resolve to a warning page hosted by my country... They could not force the operators of the pirate bay to reject users based on their ip block... Why? Because the operators of the pirate bay were ROTFLOL when my country asked them to do this, waving with a piece of paper telling them their site was illegal IN MY COUNTRY, whilst they were living in a completely different country...
But, like i said: i'm not a lawyer... maybe someone with some actual legal background can enlighten us?
The jurisdiction shouldn't extend to the rest of EU, after brexit AFAIK. UK can instruct their ISPs to selectively redirect traffic directed to that website to their own to enforce censorship like what they've done before. Problem being, if Cobra's identity remains hidden that is nothing that they can do. Especially if the location of their servers is located in a country where IP laws doesn't apply.I'm not even sure the UK can force Cøbra to reject UK visitors....
In my country, the pirate bay was banned... What they had to do is force ISP's to change their DNS so the pirate bay domain name would resolve to a warning page hosted by my country... They could not force the operators of the pirate bay to reject users based on their ip block... Why? Because the operators of the pirate bay were ROTFLOL when my country asked them to do this, waving with a piece of paper telling them their site was illegal IN MY COUNTRY, whilst they were living in a completely different country...
But, like i said: i'm not a lawyer... maybe someone with some actual legal background can enlighten us?
This does not end here, there are people who want to prove what we all already know, that Mr. Craig Wright is a fucking fraud and always will be...
Faketoshi !
Today, COPA initiated a lawsuit asking the UK High Court to declare that Mr. Craig Wright does not have copyright ownership over the Bitcoin White Paper. We stand in support of the Bitcoin developer community and the many others who've been threatened for hosting the White Paper.
https://twitter.com/opencryptoorg/status/1381642092624015360
Faketoshi !
Today, COPA initiated a lawsuit asking the UK High Court to declare that Mr. Craig Wright does not have copyright ownership over the Bitcoin White Paper. We stand in support of the Bitcoin developer community and the many others who've been threatened for hosting the White Paper.
https://twitter.com/opencryptoorg/status/1381642092624015360
I also read the news about Cøbra and they said that Cøbra and Marquardt are the same individual, but both sides denied it. It seems that a lot of news and public opinion has affected Cøbra. If he does not stand up to appeal, the only way is to suffer strong blows from the law and public opinion.
You know how news always wants to get the scoop no matter how scummy they look, if it gets them clicks then they will fabricate any stories and sell their mothers, there's no good journalism in this day and age.
I also read the news about Cøbra and they said that Cøbra and Marquardt are the same individual, but both sides denied it. It seems that a lot of news and public opinion has affected Cøbra. If he does not stand up to appeal, the only way is to suffer strong blows from the law and public opinion.
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
Another attempt to double or tripple FUD.Craig Wright is not and will never be recognized as Bitcoin founder. Never. He was detected by many plagiarism attempts. It makes sense to wipe out any attempt from him or any governments that support Craig Wright.
Craig Wright Accused of Plagiarism Again. Cointelegraph is a shit online newspaper but you can dig more to find more researches about Craig Wright plagiarism.
If he wins this case, he is legally recognized as Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin.
I'm still confused... if court has accepted that he's "Satoshi Nakamoto" or only his claim over whitepaper. What does this claim really mean?
From my tiny understanding on how legal system works, Cøbra should be able to appeal. But this may mean to give his identity. 
On the other hand, if bitcoin.org cannot host the whitepaper, maybe they can still link to it? Because there were plenty of powerful Bitcoin companies that were showing support and hosting the white paper.
On the other hand, if bitcoin.org cannot host the whitepaper, maybe they can still link to it? Because there were plenty of powerful Bitcoin companies that were showing support and hosting the white paper.
This can only be understood in full once the notice is published by him on the website or may be available through public grievance. The appeal will justify whole thing, like the legal language "no part of the white-paper shall be displayed on the site neither accessible by any means of whatsoever, displayed ads, tabs, sections or sub-sections lead to the white-paper". and blah blah. They will have it crafted that way and they always do because they literally think about it based on how much they getting paid by appealer. Lolz. That's how the court works. After all they also need to feed their salaries, isn't it.
What’s up with Cøbra?
You also should know that Cobra want (vague reveals but it seems like that) to sell Bitcoin.org domain (in last year).
theymos, the head admin of our forum, choose a good move to separate the forum with Bitcoin.org website and Cobra.
Domain name update
It is why the hyperlink to update wallet at the top is directed to https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.
You also should know that Cobra want (vague reveals but it seems like that) to sell Bitcoin.org domain (in last year).
theymos, the head admin of our forum, choose a good move to separate the forum with Bitcoin.org website and Cobra.
Domain name update
It is why the hyperlink to update wallet at the top is directed to https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.
I haven’t managed to get hold of the official Court ruling, which, since it has not yet apparently been officially handed to Cøbra’s defence team, it may therefore take some days to be accesible. The source of all this information is currently focused on Ontier’s press releases.
This part relates to the ruling (similar of course to that depicted in the OP):
It does seem that the scope is restricted to the UK, so I figure that the site, were it to comply, would need to block access to the whitepaper by IP geolocalization. Since the whitepaper is in multiple languages, I wonder if it would apply to all language versions currently accessible from the Uk on Bitcoin.org.
This part relates to the ruling (similar of course to that depicted in the OP):
Quote
His Honour Judge Hodge QC, sitting as a Judge of the Chancery Division, heard Dr Wright’s application today 28 June 2021, following which the Court granted Dr Wright’s request: (1) for an injunction prohibiting the Defendant from infringing Dr Wright’s copyright in the United Kingdom whether by making the White Paper available for download from the bitcoin.org website or in any other way; and (2) for an order requiring the Defendant to publish a copy of the Court’s order on the bitcoin.org website for 6 months. The Court also ordered that there be an inquiry as to damages caused by the Defendant’s infringement of Dr Wright’s copyright in the UK and that ‘Cøbra’ makes an interim payment on account of Dr Wright’s cost of the proceedings.
See: https://www.ontier.digital/post/uk-court-awards-bitcoin-creator-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-copyright-infringement-claimIt does seem that the scope is restricted to the UK, so I figure that the site, were it to comply, would need to block access to the whitepaper by IP geolocalization. Since the whitepaper is in multiple languages, I wonder if it would apply to all language versions currently accessible from the Uk on Bitcoin.org.
Maybe another anonymous user might be able to host the whitepaper again just to annoy Faketoshi. I think what Cøbra did was a good thing though, preserving his anonymity in that time because this take down isn't going to be permanent and a lot of Cøbra sympathizers would probably post the whitepaper somewhere out there.
I'm defenately not a lawyer (far from it), but as far as i understand, it was a UK court making a UK decission that should not impact anybody not doing business/living in the UK...
I'm not even sure the UK can force Cøbra to reject UK visitors....
In my country, the pirate bay was banned... What they had to do is force ISP's to change their DNS so the pirate bay domain name would resolve to a warning page hosted by my country... They could not force the operators of the pirate bay to reject users based on their ip block... Why? Because the operators of the pirate bay were ROTFLOL when my country asked them to do this, waving with a piece of paper telling them their site was illegal IN MY COUNTRY, whilst they were living in a completely different country...
But, like i said: i'm not a lawyer... maybe someone with some actual legal background can enlighten us?
I'm not even sure the UK can force Cøbra to reject UK visitors....
In my country, the pirate bay was banned... What they had to do is force ISP's to change their DNS so the pirate bay domain name would resolve to a warning page hosted by my country... They could not force the operators of the pirate bay to reject users based on their ip block... Why? Because the operators of the pirate bay were ROTFLOL when my country asked them to do this, waving with a piece of paper telling them their site was illegal IN MY COUNTRY, whilst they were living in a completely different country...
But, like i said: i'm not a lawyer... maybe someone with some actual legal background can enlighten us?
From my tiny understanding on how legal system works, Cøbra should be able to appeal. But this may mean to give his identity.
On the other hand, if bitcoin.org cannot host the whitepaper, maybe they can still link to it? Because there were plenty of powerful Bitcoin companies that were showing support and hosting the white paper.
On the other hand, if bitcoin.org cannot host the whitepaper, maybe they can still link to it? Because there were plenty of powerful Bitcoin companies that were showing support and hosting the white paper.
The court case wasn't contested by the defendant and that was the default judgement. It doesn't necessarily mean that the claims were valid.
It depends on how the IP laws is enacted within the jurisdiction that the website is hosted in. At best, it wouldn't be taken down completely. Just that the site or parts of it won't be accessible within the UK, assuming that Cobra is unwilling to comply.
It depends on how the IP laws is enacted within the jurisdiction that the website is hosted in. At best, it wouldn't be taken down completely. Just that the site or parts of it won't be accessible within the UK, assuming that Cobra is unwilling to comply.
Since when was the whitepaper intellectual property? This judgement is beyond absurd.
In the recent court hearing in UK this clown "Craig Wright" and self claimed Bitcoin inventor has won the lawsuit over bitcoin whitepaper copyright claim against Cobra and Court has ordered Cøbra to remove the whitepaper from bitcoin.org website and display the court judgment notice and pay fine.
This is so unfortune, it's true we might differences with Cøbra over many things but I think this time we need to support him. Whatever we can do or even if "theymos" can do to prevent this to happen.
"In a remote hearing today, a judge said that “Cøbra,” the pseudonymous operator of Bitcoin.org, must display a notice on his website about the judgment, pay at least £35,000 ($48,600) in legal costs and remove the whitepaper from his site. Cøbra lost the case through a default judgment; he mounted no defense to preserve his pseudonymity."
There is short reply from Cøbra on this hearing
https://decrypt.co/74657/bitcoin-inventor-whitepaper-lawsuit-craig-wright-cobra
This is so unfortune, it's true we might differences with Cøbra over many things but I think this time we need to support him. Whatever we can do or even if "theymos" can do to prevent this to happen.
"In a remote hearing today, a judge said that “Cøbra,” the pseudonymous operator of Bitcoin.org, must display a notice on his website about the judgment, pay at least £35,000 ($48,600) in legal costs and remove the whitepaper from his site. Cøbra lost the case through a default judgment; he mounted no defense to preserve his pseudonymity."
There is short reply from Cøbra on this hearing
https://decrypt.co/74657/bitcoin-inventor-whitepaper-lawsuit-craig-wright-cobra
Jump to: