Tossing a (Bit)coin: UK Court Rejects Dr. Craig Wright’s Claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, But What’s Next?

Back in March this year, the High Court of Justice in the UK dismissed the claim by Dr. Craig Wright, a computer scientist and businessman from Australia, that he is the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto, the unrevealed mastermind behind Bitcoin. Justice Mellor, in the decision issued on May 20, found that Dr. Wright did not write the Bitcoin White Paper or the source code of the cryptocurrency. On July 16, the Justice issued further injunctions against Dr. Wright to prohibit him or his companies “from publishing or causing to be published any claims implying that he is Satoshi, or that he is the author of the Bitcoin White Paper, Bitcoin source code or the like” and to mandate him to “delete all such published statements” (at para 121). As a result, Dr. Wright updated his website with a legal notice stating he is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, among other things.

Justice Mellor also referred Dr. Wright to the prosecution for making perjuries and presenting forged documents, which so far has not been initiated.

For many, this outcome marked the end (perhaps?) of Dr. Wright’s self-ordained entitlement to the intellectual property of the world’s largest cryptocurrency by market cap. However, cases like this will continue to emerge in courts around the globe, given the permeation of this pseudonymously designed cryptocurrency. Unlike centralized currencies, Bitcoin’s original code is open-source that anyone can access, modify, and transmit. Furthermore, developers who make modifications to the original blockchain may claim derivative copyright on the redacted protocol. While Dr. Wright’s case was settled in the UK, in other jurisdictions his issues and claims may be litigated and re-litigated.

It is important to appreciate the limitation of legal systems to addressing a potentially impactful topic in the digitalized economy today. Imagine Dr. Wright (or maybe Dr. Wrong) successfully claims to be Satoshi in a court somewhere else, how will that change the landscape of jurisprudence on patenting and copyrighting an open-source cryptocurrency? If that judge favours Dr. Wright, no doubt, they will be tossing a coin that profoundly alters the future of technological advancement.

Cases cited: [2024] EWHC 1198 (Ch), [2024] EWHC 1809 (Ch)