Topic: So, you want to get sued by a scammer? - page 2. (Read 1197 times)
Aren’t there anti-SLAPP laws for this kind of issues? Because it is an issue. Frauds, and con-artists can’t just file a defamation lawsuit as a convenience to stop people from talking. Plus what happened to free speech? I believe we should start including the message Craig is NOT Satoshi in our transactions. Haha.
That’s all? But he can’t “SLAPP” each person in the community, like what he’s doing/did to Peter McCormack and hodlnaut. Plus I believe he is losing those lawsuits, and the money spent in his own legal fees. Calvin Ayre can’t support him financially forever.
the trick for SLAPPERS is when they file a claim. they dont need a lawyer. they just file a claim for cheap. and then periodically just pester you with a new question every 14-28 days. just being annoying. keeping the claim alive.
their aim is not to get it to trial. to actually be judged. but to waste time for months/years with endless questions. forcing YOU to waste your time and money defending yourself.
the game is that if you stop responding they can trigger a default judgement in their favour,, thus costing you more. or just keep you in limbo for months/years hoping you pay them just to go away because its cheaper to shut them up than for you to keep defending their annoying case that is now costing you thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours..
they want you to seek legal advice. they will tailor their questions into things that end up costing you money to respond. they want to keep you wrapped up in lengthy periods hoping you calculate how much it would cost to fight something for 1-2 years. and then offer them a hush settlement at below that amount to just go away.
their game is to get a settlement or bankrupt you. its not about getting it into a courtroom trial.
if all goes quiet and they dont push a judgement.. all they have lost is about a couple hundred dollars, to file a claim. and about 30 minutes a month writing you letters.
your the one that has spent thousands of dollars checking with lawyers.
your the one that has spend hundreds of hours trying to answer them.
while you think your winning by replying/playing their game. your not realising its their game.
their questions content mean nothing. your replies content mean nothing.
they are just wanting to waste your time and money.
Quote
slapp:
A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.
A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.
CSW game all along has not been to claim any coins from any satoshi stash. he knows he doesnt have the keys.
CSW game has ALWAYS been slapp lawsuits.
it wont matter if you send the letter Gmax noted. CSW will still target you and just pretend he never received the advance warning. and then SLAPP you into months of legal costs of making you prove that you informed him.
it wont matter that you did or didnt then put the white paper on the address.
it wont matter that he has no claim on the paper.
it wont matter if you can prove things on day 1
he will still target you with delay processes requiring your defense to spend legal hours filing papers just to answer his strategically alloted questions every 14 days.. hoping you wil just hand him a settlement to avoid your legal costs just to fight his empty claims.
thats how slapps work
CSW game has ALWAYS been slapp lawsuits.
it wont matter if you send the letter Gmax noted. CSW will still target you and just pretend he never received the advance warning. and then SLAPP you into months of legal costs of making you prove that you informed him.
it wont matter that you did or didnt then put the white paper on the address.
it wont matter that he has no claim on the paper.
it wont matter if you can prove things on day 1
he will still target you with delay processes requiring your defense to spend legal hours filing papers just to answer his strategically alloted questions every 14 days.. hoping you wil just hand him a settlement to avoid your legal costs just to fight his empty claims.
thats how slapps work
That’s all? But he can’t “SLAPP” each person in the community, like what he’s doing/did to Peter McCormack and hodlnaut. Plus I believe he is losing those lawsuits, and the money spent in his own legal fees. Calvin Ayre can’t support him financially forever.
All that matters ^_^
Code:
https://faketoshi.cypherpunks.xyz/
Code:
https://cypherpunks.xyz/bitcoin.html
https://cypherpunks.xyz/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc
https://cypherpunks.xyz/bitcoin.pdf
https://cypherpunks.xyz/anti-license.txt
https://cypherpunks.xyz/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc
https://cypherpunks.xyz/bitcoin.pdf
https://cypherpunks.xyz/anti-license.txt
This man again? Well, I don't know what makes him so interested to be and acquired as Satoshi. Does he really need that kind of popularity and also acknowledgment.
Well, if somebody still believes n what he said, clear enough that they are one in crypto that only follows hypes and also only sees the progress based on one chance. Here, about every update by CW or other issues, better to check and recheck first if you don't know about CW itself
Well, if somebody still believes n what he said, clear enough that they are one in crypto that only follows hypes and also only sees the progress based on one chance. Here, about every update by CW or other issues, better to check and recheck first if you don't know about CW itself
CSW game all along has not been to claim any coins from any satoshi stash. he knows he doesnt have the keys.
CSW game has ALWAYS been slapp lawsuits.
it wont matter if you send the letter Gmax noted. CSW will still target you and just pretend he never received the advance warning. and then SLAPP you into months of legal costs of making you prove that you informed him.
it wont matter that you did or didnt then put the white paper on the address.
it wont matter that he has no claim on the paper.
it wont matter if you can prove things on day 1
he will still target you with delay processes requiring your defense to spend legal hours filing papers just to answer his strategically alloted questions every 14 days.. hoping you wil just hand him a settlement to avoid your legal costs just to fight his empty claims.
thats how slapps work
CSW game has ALWAYS been slapp lawsuits.
it wont matter if you send the letter Gmax noted. CSW will still target you and just pretend he never received the advance warning. and then SLAPP you into months of legal costs of making you prove that you informed him.
it wont matter that you did or didnt then put the white paper on the address.
it wont matter that he has no claim on the paper.
it wont matter if you can prove things on day 1
he will still target you with delay processes requiring your defense to spend legal hours filing papers just to answer his strategically alloted questions every 14 days.. hoping you wil just hand him a settlement to avoid your legal costs just to fight his empty claims.
thats how slapps work
@xtraelv
It is something that can easily be manipulated with tools such as Adobe and can even be done directly online on a website.
You can change the date, keywords, and other stuff.
Frankly, coming from this person I wouldn't even be surprised. It wouldn't be the first time.
What is the chance to have 2 white papers about a disrupting technology created exactly at the same date and the same hour?
Statistically, you have more chance to win a nice amount scratching lottery tickets
It is something that can easily be manipulated with tools such as Adobe and can even be done directly online on a website.
You can change the date, keywords, and other stuff.
Frankly, coming from this person I wouldn't even be surprised. It wouldn't be the first time.
What is the chance to have 2 white papers about a disrupting technology created exactly at the same date and the same hour?
Statistically, you have more chance to win a nice amount scratching lottery tickets
It was sarcasm.
The bitcoin whitepaper is available from the 2009 archive with the same meta data as the one on bitcoin.org
Craigs version has a newer version number, exact same creation time and date.
The simplest explanation is that Craigs version is fake.
@xtraelv
It is something that can easily be manipulated with tools such as Adobe and can even be done directly online on a website.
You can change the date, keywords, and other stuff.
Frankly, coming from this person I wouldn't even be surprised. It wouldn't be the first time.
What is the chance to have 2 white papers about a disrupting technology created exactly at the same date and the same hour?
Statistically, you have more chance to win a nice amount scratching lottery tickets
See, I can say Jesus Christ created the white paper before anyone else in the year 0 in the Gregorian calendar.
https://www.metadata2go.com/result/611980a8-ddd8-4fc7-8b46-1a9bd8ec8c68
It is something that can easily be manipulated with tools such as Adobe and can even be done directly online on a website.
You can change the date, keywords, and other stuff.
Frankly, coming from this person I wouldn't even be surprised. It wouldn't be the first time.
What is the chance to have 2 white papers about a disrupting technology created exactly at the same date and the same hour?
Statistically, you have more chance to win a nice amount scratching lottery tickets
See, I can say Jesus Christ created the white paper before anyone else in the year 0 in the Gregorian calendar.
https://www.metadata2go.com/result/611980a8-ddd8-4fc7-8b46-1a9bd8ec8c68
Craig Wright must be amazing.
What a feat.
The Satoshi whitepaper with no copyright details attached PDF version 1.4 was created at EXACTLY the same time as the PDF version 1.6 with his copyright details attached.
https://imgur.com/ge6OBUo
https://imgur.com/hSAvkgQ
https://www.metadata2go.com/result/34299c05-8cf7-494b-adf8-12cb72ca5b0a
https://www.metadata2go.com/result/5563e6d1-d810-4c39-9f4d-90645a61f603
Either a Chuck Norris moment or could it be a fake ?
What a feat.
The Satoshi whitepaper with no copyright details attached PDF version 1.4 was created at EXACTLY the same time as the PDF version 1.6 with his copyright details attached.
https://imgur.com/ge6OBUo
https://imgur.com/hSAvkgQ
https://www.metadata2go.com/result/34299c05-8cf7-494b-adf8-12cb72ca5b0a
https://www.metadata2go.com/result/5563e6d1-d810-4c39-9f4d-90645a61f603
Either a Chuck Norris moment or could it be a fake ?
I believe Craig Wright’s long-term goal for doing this is probably to take, and claim the Bitcoin name, symbol, and ticker “rights” as his own because “He Satoshi”, then use that for his forked-shitcoin fork Bcash SV.
What will be the first government to host the Bitcoin white paper to make fun with Craig Wright? 
Challenge accepted by Estonia that decided to host it to provoke him.
https://e-resident.gov.ee/bitcoin-whitepaper/
Colombia is doing the same to join Estonia and so host it as well
https://go.gov.co/bitcoin
Now I challenge him to sue Estonia's and Colombia's government
Oh, the USA are also hosting the white paper somewhere on the website of the U.S. Sentencing Commission
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/training/annual-national-training-seminar/2018/Emerging_Tech_Bitcoin_Crypto.pdf
Good luck CW
Edit:
Challenge accepted by Estonia that decided to host it to provoke him.
https://e-resident.gov.ee/bitcoin-whitepaper/
Colombia is doing the same to join Estonia and so host it as well
https://go.gov.co/bitcoin
Now I challenge him to sue Estonia's and Colombia's government
Oh, the USA are also hosting the white paper somewhere on the website of the U.S. Sentencing Commission
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/training/annual-national-training-seminar/2018/Emerging_Tech_Bitcoin_Crypto.pdf
Good luck CW
Edit:
Quote
Proud to say Miami is the first municipal government to host Satoshi’s White Paper on government site
https://twitter.com/FrancisSuarez/status/1354488469091975168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw If i was asked to say the most anti Satoshi thing i could think of i'd be hard pressed to think of something better that this
In any case, expecting mass carpet lawsuits against every dev next, hope they're ready and coordination is being prepped. Short term contingency plans for anonymous contributions behind tor, etc would also be nice. Bastards can easily finance it by Ayre shorting the market by front running the "announcement" too.
Quote
...I will burn Cryptocurrency to non existence and have the US government collect the ashes...
In any case, expecting mass carpet lawsuits against every dev next, hope they're ready and coordination is being prepped. Short term contingency plans for anonymous contributions behind tor, etc would also be nice. Bastards can easily finance it by Ayre shorting the market by front running the "announcement" too.
for sure this guy have serious mental problems. I cant explain why someone whiling to burn his money so easy. There is not a single court in this world that can win a case like this.
Maybe he gambling that ppl will step down after the threats and the cases will never get to the court but if i was a dev and get a threat like this i will never have step down.
This guy not only will loose every trial but he had in the end to pay and the trial fees.
The point of these lawsuits is not to win but cause as much financial and personal losses as possible. Easy to say that you'd never step down when you're behind a keyboard, but when you're served, fighting it means you're guaranteed huge financial and personal losses which can drag out for years (look at Kleiman), and your best case outcome is you're back to where you were before the lawsuit started. Devs should be left to code and not litigate. Since foundation is no more, hoping something is being organized to coordinate/fund raise once every contribute to git is served, at this point i'd be disappointed in faketoshi if this DIDN'T happen.
i think in this space especially devs have the money to not afraid lawsuits.
It’s not purely about money. It’s the inconvenience of breaking your routine, finding a lawyer, going to court, amd sitting in there listening to what you truly know is a charade by a con-artist. Why waste your valuable time?
https://mchenry.house.gov/bitcoin.pdf
How much do you think Ontier LLP would charge to sue US goverment?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
How much do you think Ontier LLP would charge to sue US goverment?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Thank you for your earning, I am not Satoshi
When you say "we are all Satoshi" who else are with you ? You all are just a group of developers. Why are you claiming to be Satoshi ? Satoshi is just a Japanese pseudonym. What benefits will you get by claiming to be Satoshi ?
Not literally. We are all satoshi in spirit if we believe in the principles Bitcoin was founded upon. Craig Faketoshi Wright doesn't have principles of any kind, let alone the ones enshrined in Bitcoin.
We Are All Satoshi
Except for Craig S. Wright.
Craig Wright definitely is not, but he would really like everyone to believe he is.
Satoshi Nakamoto authored the Bitcoin Whitepaper with the intention that it be shared widely, and Craig Wright’s takedown notices are fraudulent, but since he is a litigious jerk who has bankrupted people with his fraudulent legal claims in court, it is sometimes a wise strategic choice to avoid provoking him into suing, which is expensive and disruptive to a defendant even when they ultimately win.
But you might be in a good position to host this paper that Craig Wright so desperately wants taken down and kept under his exclusive control. And you might want to give notice to his attorneys, just to let them know. Below is an example notice you can send to his attornies.
Warning: sending this makes you considerably more likely to become the target of a lawsuit by Craig Wright. You should think about whether you are prepared to be in that position before sending this letter.
(This is absolutely, positively, not legal advice, and you are strongly encouraged to consult with your own attorney.)
Old version:
To: Simon Cohen <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Ferguson <[email protected]>
Mr. Cohen,
I have recently become aware that the firm of Ontier LLP has been sending notices on behalf of Craig S. Wright to parties hosting “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” (the “Bitcoin Whitepaper”), alleging that Mr. Wright is the rightful copyright holder of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that further distribution is an infringement of Wright’s exclusive rights.
I believe this to be a fraudulent misrepresentation of both the authorship of the paper and of its licensing status for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was released, along with the initial public version of the software, under the MIT license. This license is a perpetual grant to the general public of the right to “use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies” of the software and associated documentation files (including the Bitcoin Whitepaper) and may not be revoked or rescinded, even by the true author.
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was authored by a person or entity writing under the name Satoshi Nakamoto, and any exclusive rights under copyright are held by that person or entity (or their assignees). There is no evidence that Wright is that person; in fact, despite challenges in courts of law and mass media journalism, Wright has been either unable to provide proof, unwilling to produce proof, or produced documentary support in the form of forgeries. Any reasonable observer would conclude from this that Wright is unable to claim this connection through legitimate means, and is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
• Wright has attempted to defraud the courts for his own personal advantage on previous occasions. For one example, he perjured himself in an earlier legal proceeding, which was exposed by the true owners of $200M+ in bitcoins he claimed to own producing unforgeable digital signatures stating that Wright was a fraud. His claims cannot simply be taken at face value, even when made through counsel.
It is therefore my good faith belief that I have valid license to distribute copies of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that Wright’s claims do not have any bearing on that right. Upon that belief, I am hosting a copy at [ADDRESS].
I am providing notice to your firm so that any credible claims to the contrary may be addressed in a timely fashion to avoid running out the clock on equitable defenses.
Best,
[NAME]
Except for Craig S. Wright.
Craig Wright definitely is not, but he would really like everyone to believe he is.
Satoshi Nakamoto authored the Bitcoin Whitepaper with the intention that it be shared widely, and Craig Wright’s takedown notices are fraudulent, but since he is a litigious jerk who has bankrupted people with his fraudulent legal claims in court, it is sometimes a wise strategic choice to avoid provoking him into suing, which is expensive and disruptive to a defendant even when they ultimately win.
But you might be in a good position to host this paper that Craig Wright so desperately wants taken down and kept under his exclusive control. And you might want to give notice to his attorneys, just to let them know. Below is an example notice you can send to his attornies.
Warning: sending this makes you considerably more likely to become the target of a lawsuit by Craig Wright. You should think about whether you are prepared to be in that position before sending this letter.
(This is absolutely, positively, not legal advice, and you are strongly encouraged to consult with your own attorney.)
Quote
To: Simon Cohen <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Ferguson <[email protected]>
Mr. Cohen,
I have recently become aware that the firm of Ontier LLP has been sending notices on behalf of Craig S. Wright to parties hosting “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” (the “Bitcoin Whitepaper”), alleging that Mr. Wright is the rightful copyright holder of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that further distribution is an infringement of Wright’s exclusive rights.
I believe this to be a fraudulent misrepresentation of both the authorship of the paper and of its licensing status for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was released into the public domain upon its initial publication by Satoshi Nakamoto on the Cypherpunks mailing list. All participants to the Cypherpunks list, including Satoshi Nakamoto, agreed to the Cypherpunks anti-License (CPL) for their list contributions, which states "The intent of the Cypherpunks anti-License (CPL) is to inform users that they are free to use and redistribute the indicated work or any derived or modified work in any manner they choose. Works distributed under the CPL are in the Public Domain. [...] The distributors will not use or participate as far as they are able to government legal systems to attempt to enforce requests restricting the use, modifications, or redistribution of the work for perpetuity."
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was additionally released, along with the initial public version of the software, under the MIT license. This license is a perpetual grant to the general public of the right to “use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies” of the software and associated documentation files (including the Bitcoin Whitepaper) and may not be revoked or rescinded, even by the true author.
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was authored by a person or entity writing under the name Satoshi Nakamoto, and any exclusive rights under copyright are held by that person or entity (or their assignees). There is no evidence that Wright is that person; in fact, despite challenges in courts of law and mass media journalism, Wright has been either unable to provide proof, unwilling to produce proof, or produced documentary support in the form of forgeries. Any reasonable observer would conclude from this that Wright is unable to claim this connection through legitimate means, and is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
• Wright has attempted to defraud the courts for his own personal advantage on previous occasions. For one example, he perjured himself in an earlier legal proceeding, which was exposed by the true owners of $200M+ in bitcoins he claimed to own producing unforgeable digital signatures stating that Wright was a fraud. His claims cannot simply be taken at face value, even when made through counsel.
It is therefore my good faith belief that I have valid license to distribute copies of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that Wright’s claims do not have any bearing on that right. Upon that belief, I am hosting a copy at [ADDRESS].
I am providing notice to your firm so that any credible claims to the contrary may be addressed in a timely fashion to avoid running out the clock on equitable defenses.
Best,
[NAME]
Cc: Paul Ferguson <[email protected]>
Mr. Cohen,
I have recently become aware that the firm of Ontier LLP has been sending notices on behalf of Craig S. Wright to parties hosting “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” (the “Bitcoin Whitepaper”), alleging that Mr. Wright is the rightful copyright holder of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that further distribution is an infringement of Wright’s exclusive rights.
I believe this to be a fraudulent misrepresentation of both the authorship of the paper and of its licensing status for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was released into the public domain upon its initial publication by Satoshi Nakamoto on the Cypherpunks mailing list. All participants to the Cypherpunks list, including Satoshi Nakamoto, agreed to the Cypherpunks anti-License (CPL) for their list contributions, which states "The intent of the Cypherpunks anti-License (CPL) is to inform users that they are free to use and redistribute the indicated work or any derived or modified work in any manner they choose. Works distributed under the CPL are in the Public Domain. [...] The distributors will not use or participate as far as they are able to government legal systems to attempt to enforce requests restricting the use, modifications, or redistribution of the work for perpetuity."
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was additionally released, along with the initial public version of the software, under the MIT license. This license is a perpetual grant to the general public of the right to “use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies” of the software and associated documentation files (including the Bitcoin Whitepaper) and may not be revoked or rescinded, even by the true author.
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was authored by a person or entity writing under the name Satoshi Nakamoto, and any exclusive rights under copyright are held by that person or entity (or their assignees). There is no evidence that Wright is that person; in fact, despite challenges in courts of law and mass media journalism, Wright has been either unable to provide proof, unwilling to produce proof, or produced documentary support in the form of forgeries. Any reasonable observer would conclude from this that Wright is unable to claim this connection through legitimate means, and is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
• Wright has attempted to defraud the courts for his own personal advantage on previous occasions. For one example, he perjured himself in an earlier legal proceeding, which was exposed by the true owners of $200M+ in bitcoins he claimed to own producing unforgeable digital signatures stating that Wright was a fraud. His claims cannot simply be taken at face value, even when made through counsel.
It is therefore my good faith belief that I have valid license to distribute copies of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that Wright’s claims do not have any bearing on that right. Upon that belief, I am hosting a copy at [ADDRESS].
I am providing notice to your firm so that any credible claims to the contrary may be addressed in a timely fashion to avoid running out the clock on equitable defenses.
Best,
[NAME]
Old version:
Quote
To: Simon Cohen <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Ferguson <[email protected]>
Mr. Cohen,
I have recently become aware that the firm of Ontier LLP has been sending notices on behalf of Craig S. Wright to parties hosting “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” (the “Bitcoin Whitepaper”), alleging that Mr. Wright is the rightful copyright holder of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that further distribution is an infringement of Wright’s exclusive rights.
I believe this to be a fraudulent misrepresentation of both the authorship of the paper and of its licensing status for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was released, along with the initial public version of the software, under the MIT license. This license is a perpetual grant to the general public of the right to “use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies” of the software and associated documentation files (including the Bitcoin Whitepaper) and may not be revoked or rescinded, even by the true author.
• The Bitcoin Whitepaper was authored by a person or entity writing under the name Satoshi Nakamoto, and any exclusive rights under copyright are held by that person or entity (or their assignees). There is no evidence that Wright is that person; in fact, despite challenges in courts of law and mass media journalism, Wright has been either unable to provide proof, unwilling to produce proof, or produced documentary support in the form of forgeries. Any reasonable observer would conclude from this that Wright is unable to claim this connection through legitimate means, and is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
• Wright has attempted to defraud the courts for his own personal advantage on previous occasions. For one example, he perjured himself in an earlier legal proceeding, which was exposed by the true owners of $200M+ in bitcoins he claimed to own producing unforgeable digital signatures stating that Wright was a fraud. His claims cannot simply be taken at face value, even when made through counsel.
It is therefore my good faith belief that I have valid license to distribute copies of the Bitcoin Whitepaper and that Wright’s claims do not have any bearing on that right. Upon that belief, I am hosting a copy at [ADDRESS].
I am providing notice to your firm so that any credible claims to the contrary may be addressed in a timely fashion to avoid running out the clock on equitable defenses.
Best,
[NAME]
Hi Greg,
You are doing a great job for the Bitcoin Project. Sre you sure you all are Satoshi except Craig Wright ? What a out myself ? When you say "we are all Satoshi" who else are with you ? You all are just a group of developers. Why are you claiming to be Satoshi ? Satoshi is just a Japanese pseudonym. What benefits will you get by claiming to be Satoshi ?
If i was asked to say the most anti Satoshi thing i could think of i'd be hard pressed to think of something better that this
In any case, expecting mass carpet lawsuits against every dev next, hope they're ready and coordination is being prepped. Short term contingency plans for anonymous contributions behind tor, etc would also be nice. Bastards can easily finance it by Ayre shorting the market by front running the "announcement" too.
Quote
...I will burn Cryptocurrency to non existence and have the US government collect the ashes...
In any case, expecting mass carpet lawsuits against every dev next, hope they're ready and coordination is being prepped. Short term contingency plans for anonymous contributions behind tor, etc would also be nice. Bastards can easily finance it by Ayre shorting the market by front running the "announcement" too.
for sure this guy have serious mental problems. I cant explain why someone whiling to burn his money so easy. There is not a single court in this world that can win a case like this.
Maybe he gambling that ppl will step down after the threats and the cases will never get to the court but if i was a dev and get a threat like this i will never have step down.
This guy not only will loose every trial but he had in the end to pay and the trial fees.
The point of these lawsuits is not to win but cause as much financial and personal losses as possible. Easy to say that you'd never step down when you're behind a keyboard, but when you're served, fighting it means you're guaranteed huge financial and personal losses which can drag out for years (look at Kleiman), and your best case outcome is you're back to where you were before the lawsuit started. Devs should be left to code and not litigate. Since foundation is no more, hoping something is being organized to coordinate/fund raise once every contribute to git is served, at this point i'd be disappointed in faketoshi if this DIDN'T happen.
i think in this space especially devs have the money to not afraid lawsuits.
That's just not true, devs are not traders or investors (or lawyers). Time is money, and they're already committing a lot of their time to the project, they're the ultimate "i'm in it for the tech" people. I'm sure some that had spare resources are well off, but many like Andreas A. who despite writing one of the first books on it, never held a huge stash. I'm going to guess you never been dragged through the courts, constant lawyer fees, endless emergency motions, never ending meeting etc etc etc... are no fun, now when it drags for years it becomes a real issue (and that's the point). Devs don't mind compromising on what they perceive as semantics, just to be left alone and continue working on the tech (exactly what we see happening here). Expecting devs to jump on the grenade not for their personal work, but to defend communities' ability to rightfully use the term bitcoin is ridiculous. The consequence of such (non tech) decisions should be analyzed by lawyers, funded by investors (who have the most to loose). Luckily as we see Fidelity (and coinbase?) hosting the whitepaper they seemed to have picked up on this.
If i was asked to say the most anti Satoshi thing i could think of i'd be hard pressed to think of something better that this
In any case, expecting mass carpet lawsuits against every dev next, hope they're ready and coordination is being prepped. Short term contingency plans for anonymous contributions behind tor, etc would also be nice. Bastards can easily finance it by Ayre shorting the market by front running the "announcement" too.
Quote
...I will burn Cryptocurrency to non existence and have the US government collect the ashes...
In any case, expecting mass carpet lawsuits against every dev next, hope they're ready and coordination is being prepped. Short term contingency plans for anonymous contributions behind tor, etc would also be nice. Bastards can easily finance it by Ayre shorting the market by front running the "announcement" too.
for sure this guy have serious mental problems. I cant explain why someone whiling to burn his money so easy. There is not a single court in this world that can win a case like this.
Maybe he gambling that ppl will step down after the threats and the cases will never get to the court but if i was a dev and get a threat like this i will never have step down.
This guy not only will loose every trial but he had in the end to pay and the trial fees.
The point of these lawsuits is not to win but cause as much financial and personal losses as possible. Easy to say that you'd never step down when you're behind a keyboard, but when you're served, fighting it means you're guaranteed huge financial and personal losses which can drag out for years (look at Kleiman), and your best case outcome is you're back to where you were before the lawsuit started. Devs should be left to code and not litigate. Since foundation is no more, hoping something is being organized to coordinate/fund raise once every contribute to git is served, at this point i'd be disappointed in faketoshi if this DIDN'T happen.
i think in this space especially devs have the money to not afraid lawsuits.
Yo, Crack Wrong, did you see https://bitcointalk.org/bitcoin.pdf yet?
I can't wait for theymos to receive your legal threats and publish them to make it clear to the world that you are illegitimately and possibly-illegally attempting to stifle discussion.
I can't wait for theymos to receive your legal threats and publish them to make it clear to the world that you are illegitimately and possibly-illegally attempting to stifle discussion.
for sure this guy have serious mental problems. I cant explain why someone whiling to burn his money so easy. There is not a single court in this world that can win a case like this.
Maybe he gambling that ppl will step down after the threats and the cases will never get to the court but if i was a dev and get a threat like this i will never have step down.
This guy not only will loose every trial but he had in the end to pay and the trial fees.
^ I once heard a theory from my friend who is a lawyer, he said that "when in court it doesn't matter who is right or wrong, what matters is an accurate argument and explanation". I am sure the scamtoshi will lose if the claimant has sufficient solid evidence of the rights of the Bitcoin whitepaper. I am really looking forward to the happy news where Scamtoshi Craig Wright will go to jail for a fake Bitcoin copyright claim. Maybe he gambling that ppl will step down after the threats and the cases will never get to the court but if i was a dev and get a threat like this i will never have step down.
This guy not only will loose every trial but he had in the end to pay and the trial fees.
Jump to: