Author

Topic: Who owns the rights to the Bitcoin Whitepaper? (Read 178 times)

hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 541
Bitcoin Casino Est. 2013
I can accross something similar to this today.
Quote
Liu is a crypto entrepreneur from China and said his goal in registering the document was to point out that copyright is technically meaningless in this context. To be clear, Liu chose not to answer whether or not he is Satoshi Nakamoto when asked by CoinDesk.
He said:
“I filed it just to let people know anyone can register a copyright. Everyone can be Satoshi Nakamoto
."
Source link: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2019/05/30/everyone-can-be-satoshi-liu-breaks-silence-on-contest-of-craig-wrights-bitcoin-copyright/

You can can check out the whole thread here: People claiming to be Satoshi (List of Faketoshis)
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1296
Crypto Casino and Sportsbook
I want to know currently who has the rights over the WP.

Nobody. It's open source.
This option seems to me the most acceptable for a decentralized system in which there is no big boss, where the network simultaneously "belongs to everyone" (the right of everyone to use it) and at the same time "to no one" (the absence of a single center and owner). If someone had ownership of WP, that would be a contradiction. I believe that WP belongs to everyone (everyone has the right to access this information) and at the same time to no one (there are no specific personalized rights holders). I dare to say this: WP, like bitcoin, belongs to the crypto community - both to everyone and to no one personally.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 2124
Basically the well known scammer called Craig Wright exploited the legal system in UK to win a fake case against an anonymous entity called Cøbra who has control over a centralized website called bitcoin.org. The result was the court order to remove the paper from that website for UK IPs.
His days are also limited until he is thrown behind the bars like the others Faketohis have been trying to scam people and without any results trying to convince people to also be part of this cheap game.He has only won the particular battle and we all know how was it possible but the clown will see the end results of his cheap manipulation tricks ending up soon.

Yeah, I understand that you still can mine with good profit, but you need to spend a lot on the hardware and pay for electricity. I hold GMT Token instead of it, you can hold it and get a certain part of mining power and it mines btc directly from the pool. You can connect a wallet and get btc daily with 24% APR.
The thread is about bitcoin whitepaper not about mining stuff so would advise you to read the content of the thread before you post anything.You are newbie on the forum and there are some mistakes we make but reading is that we should be doing in the first instance so be on topic only man.
jr. member
Activity: 46
Merit: 66
#WeAreAllHodlonaut
Thanks pooya87, I'll have to quote it in case anyone else is looking for similar information.

Quote
Hey guys,

As judgement has now been entered against me for "copyright infringement", I'll soon receive a UK court order to stop broadcasting the Bitcoin whitepaper to the UK. The court order will be published on the usual UK judgements site (https://www.bailii.org/). I've been shown a draft, and the heading of the order reads:

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

Obviously, Bitcoin.org has to follow the laws of the land in the jurisdictions it serves. The UK makes up a noticeable amount of our traffic, and the UK ISPs will block us if we don't comply. Undoing such a block would come at great expense and would take some time, as all things legal tend to do. On balance of "how can we maximize the good we do?" I think complying with the order and continuing to serve UK visitors other valuable Bitcoin educational material is important. The Bitcoin whitepaper doesn't get tons of traffic each day (there's obviously some days with lots of traffic like a prominent person tweets out the link to it), and even then, this order is only limited to just UK visitors.

Also, I don't want anyone associated with the company behind Bitcoin.org, if ever identified, and if even temporarily in the UK, to be at risk of potentially 2 years in jail. Indeed, as one judge in relevant UK case law put it:

"In circumstances where directors of the defendants may wish to come to this country on business or for pleasure, the prospect that their next visit may be for a more extended duration and in less comfortable accommodation than anticipated should provide a real incentive to comply with an order."

It goes without saying that I don't want to put myself and others at risk of some serious time in a UK jail.

Shortly after I receive the order the following changes will be made to the website:

The Bitcoin whitepaper located at https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf won't be accessible to UK based visitors.
All derived works of the Bitcoin whitepaper such as translations located here: https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper will not be accessible to UK based visitors.
The court requires that we publish information about the infringement, to deter future infringers (there's very specific provisions of the wording and where to place this notice), for a 6 month period. UK based visitors will see a small banner near the top of the site, with a short sentence about the the case, that default judgement was entered, and that Wright was the winner. It's more like a short summary of what happened, and not really a promotion of Wright. The judge was particular to add the wording of "default judgement", and also "the claim was undefended".
I believe at some point the COPA case will prove Wright perjured himself in obtaining this judgement and order. Hopefully in the next few years he'll be brought to justice. We live in a stupid world where people can get locked away for years for relatively minor offences like drug possession, however people like Wright can just continue on abusing the courts with no real consequences. It sucks that me, hodlonaut, McCormack, and various Bitcoin developers have to deal with this nonsense, but truth will prevail in the end and liars like him can never succeed in trying to stop Bitcoin's success no matter how hard they try.

Source of the quote: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/Bitcoin.org/issues/3698

It appears from what I read that the bitcoin whitepaper is inaccessible in UK!
On the other hand i spot this: https://craigwright.net/bitcoin-white-paper.pdf
Didn't he break the law like that?
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
Basically the well known scammer called Craig Wright exploited the legal system in UK to win a fake case against an anonymous entity called Cøbra who has control over a centralized website called bitcoin.org. The result was the court order to remove the paper from that website for UK IPs.

However since the bitcoin paper and the original bitcoin software were both released on public domain and under MIT license, nobody owns the right to it and no court can legally force their removal unless the whole legal system is exploitable which it was in UK.
hero member
Activity: 1722
Merit: 801
The owner is real Satoshi Nakamoto but we can not know who is (are) real Satoshi Nakamoto

Anyone tries to claim as real Satoshi Nakamoto but can not sign a message from past addresses should be FakeToshi. You don't have to find and know real Satoshi Nakamoto and you must not believe in any Faketoshi.

How to be a "Faketoshi", better than any other "Faketoshi" !?!
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 2124
There was only win against the rights over bitcoin.org and particularly for British people but spending money on the judicial system is not a new concept and what this faketoshi is trying to prove will never happen in reality as he can't prove the ownership to the funds he said belong to him so you can see where he is headed towards.So he won that particular case of infringement against Copra and after that there was tweet from bitcoin.org Twitter handle :

I also would label him as scammer.
This image fits directly for this scammer:

legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
How a man can copyright something which was originally released under the open source MIT License?
Nobody really cares what Faketoshi claims, but he can obviously create fake ownership license with false signatures because there is big monetary gain he could win.
Same Bitcoin whitepaper is already hosted on United States government websites like USSC.gov and I don't see CSW is suing US government for that.
I wrote more about this subject last year in Faketoshi CSW vs Cøbra Bitcoin topic:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/faketoshi-csw-vs-cobra-bitcoin-5311204

legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 7490
Crypto Swap Exchange
I haven't really followed the craig wrong saga in great detail, but from my recollections, I think he won that case because Cøbra never appeared in front of the court. And that was the only reason he won. If Cøbra had appeared, he would have revealed his identity.

It's quite accurate. There's discussion started by Cobra on https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/Bitcoin.org/issues/3698.

It doesn't really mean much and craig wrong is still a lying scumbag.   

I also would label him as scammer.
copper member
Activity: 2856
Merit: 3071
https://bit.ly/387FXHi lightning theory
We were puzzled too. It looks like in UK, no matter how wrong you are, if the other party doesn't show up for the trial, you may win.

Is it not a guaranteed win I thought it was?

If you don't turn up or ask for representation from another party then why do you expect to win (I'd assume cobra might've been eligible for legal aid too to have a solicitor sit on the case - probably at no expense to cobra).



Satoshi holds the rights to the whitepaper, always has. It's possible in most places to withdraw articles from the public domain afaik but I doubt they'll give up on their anonymity over a whitepaper.
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
I want to know currently who has the rights over the WP.

Nobody. It's open source.

How a man can copyright something which was originally released under the open source MIT License?

He cannot.

After reading some articles about Craig Wright and removing the Whitepaper from bitcoin.org  it is a bit unclear.

We were puzzled too. It looks like in UK, no matter how wrong you are, if the other party doesn't show up for the trial, you may win. This is what I've understood from the matter.
And the whitepaper was "removed" only from bitcoin.org and only for Brits. it's still available in a lot of other places. And even on bitcoin.org, if you don't come from UK IP you can get the whitepaper.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
I haven't really followed the craig wrong saga in great detail, but from my recollections, I think he won that case because Cøbra never appeared in front of the court. And that was the only reason he won. If Cøbra had appeared, he would have revealed his identity. It doesn't really mean much and craig wrong is still a lying scumbag.   
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
I am interested in what you are asking because I see a paradox here.

I understand that bitcoin being open source, no one could have the copyright on the whitepaper. At least it would go against Satoshi's idea of it, but this judgment seems to recognise Wright's rights.

However Craight Wright is known as Faketoshi. He claims to be Satoshi, which he has never been able to prove, and which he could easily do by signing a message from Satoshi's known addresses, as Apocollapse says.

So I don't quite understand Whitepaper rights either.

As the article says:

The Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) are sues Craig Wright of Bitcoin Whitepaper copyright, but it seems there's no final decision and still an ongoing process.

I guess Cobra got cold feet after the fact that he didn't go to the first trial.
hero member
Activity: 1148
Merit: 796
AFAIK Cøbra is still own the right of the Bitcoin Whitepaper because there's nothing changed until now [1]

The Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) are sues Craig Wright of Bitcoin Whitepaper copyright, but it seems there's no final decision and still an ongoing process. Wright have refused to prove his ownership by using the original Satoshi address, his excuse using an original address isn't a prove lol, but obviously we're know he can't and never can access Satoshi's address [2]


[1] https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/aug/06/another-court-case-fails-to-unlock-the-mystery-of-bitcoins-satoshi-nakamoto
jr. member
Activity: 46
Merit: 66
#WeAreAllHodlonaut
I want to know currently who has the rights over the WP. After reading some articles about Craig Wright and removing the Whitepaper from bitcoin.org  it is a bit unclear.
In addition the source code of the bitcoin software is an open source. 
How a man can copyright something which was originally released under the open source MIT License?
Jump to: