• Dr Adam Back, inventor of proof-of-work system cited in the bitcoin White Paper, testifies against Dr Wright’s claims about who influenced Satoshi;
  • Martti Malmi, a Finnish computer scientist who corresponded with Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009 and 2011, testifies that he “communicated with Satoshi, who I believe to be a different person to Dr. Wright”
  • Steve Lee, head of Spiral, outlines the broad significance of the case to the bitcoin community
  • Renowned British journalist Rory Cellan Jones shares perspectives and witness statement after Lord Grabiner elects not to cross-examine him

Over the past days, the seminal COPA vs Craig Wright trial has heard the testimonies of a number of high-profile COPA witnesses. Their statements outline COPA’s reasons for pursuing the case and dispute Craig Wright’s claim that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the author of the bitcoin whitepaper and founder of bitcoin.

In his witness statement, available at this link , Adam Back outlined never-before-published correspondence with Satoshi Nakamoto that contradicts Craig Wright’s previous testimony:

On 20 August 2008, Back received an email from Satoshi asking him to review a citation of Back’s prior work to include in the bitcoin White Paper. In response, Back confirmed that the citation was correct, while also pointing Satoshi to additional resources, including “B-money” by Wei Dai that Satoshi was not previously aware of. However in Dr Wright’s testimony, he claims that his thinking was profoundly influenced by Wei Dai. If Satoshi was not previously aware of Wei Dai’s B-money proposal, this would make it hard to be significantly influenced by it.

Martti Malmi, in his witness statement, which can be sourced here, outlines the nature of his interactions with Satoshi Nakamoto and the support he provided for the development of bitcoin. In it, he disputes several claims made by Dr. Wright in his statements, while also stating in court that he “communicated with Satoshi, who I believe to be a different person to Dr. Wright”

In his testimony, Dr. Wright stated that Martti first approached Satoshi from February 2009. In fact, Martti approached Satoshi on May 1, 2009. In addition, Dr. Wright mentioned Martti in the Kleiman proceedings, referring to Martti as one of the cofounders of the Silk Road and other dark web marketplaces. He cited the creation of these dark web marketplaces as the reason why he “left publicly as Satoshi in 2010”. However it is well known that Ross Ulbricht was convicted of operating the Silk Road.

In Steve Lee’s witness statement, which can be found here, Lee explained why COPA was founded and the significance of bringing this case against Dr. Wright:

Dr Wright has brought a number of lawsuits against open source developers and volunteers, and others who dispute his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Dr. Wright has also used highly provocative and aggressive language in public forums, including direct threats made against developers to negatively impact their livelihoods. Dr Wright’s actions have hurt the bitcoin community. Further to the impact that his legal actions have had on individuals, if the White Paper is threatened, and its distribution is prevented, that will harm bitcoin’s future adoption.

In addition, in a newsletter published after not taking the stand, former BBC News technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones describes his experience in meeting Craig Wright and concludes that, “By declining to challenge my evidence, Craig Wright was effectively accepting that my version of events was accurate.” Cellan-Jones’ witness statement can be read here.

The COPA v Wright trial seeks to disprove the claim made by Dr. Wright that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the author of the bitcoin White Paper and, consequently, the founder of bitcoin. Dr. Wright is involved in several lawsuits in the UK - which rely on this claim being true - alleging that multiple organisations and individuals in the crypto community violated his copyright in the bitcoin whitepaper, bitcoin database, and other intellectual property related to the creation of bitcoin. He insists, on that basis, that those organisations and individuals cannot host the bitcoin White Paper or otherwise use that intellectual property. This claim, in effect, stops the development of bitcoin, chills and silences developers with the threat of litigation, and indeed undermines the entire spirit of the open-source community.

COPA believes that this case is a matter of public interest and its outcome will create more certainty and reasonable safety for those who have dedicated their professional lives to the world-changing potential of bitcoin.