Craig Wright Admits to Editing Bitcoin White Paper Presented in COPA Trial

CoinDeskPolicyPublished on 2024-02-22Last updated on 2024-02-23

Abstract

COPA's trial to find out whether or not Craig Wright is the pseudonymous creator of bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto has completed its third week.

  • The bitcoin developers' lawyer, Alexander Gunning, presented evidence that Craig Wright had made new edits to his whitepaper, which Wright acknowledged.
  • The Crypto Open Patent Alliance wants to prove that Wright's claim to be the founder of bitcoin is a lie backed forgeries.

Craig Wright admitted to making changes to the version of the bitcoin whitepaper he presented in the Crypto Open Patent Alliance's (COPA) trial while testifying Friday.

The trial to prove whether or not Wright is the anonymous creator of the bitcoin white paper completed its third week. COPA wants to prove that Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto is a lie afforded by "industrial style forgeries," and the bitcoin developers lawyer Alexander Gunning is helping them.

On Friday, Gunning demonstrated that Wright made edits to the bitcoin whitepaper in his "LaTeX files," which Wright agreed were accurate. Wright said the edits were simply a demonstration for his representatives at Shoosmiths (his law firm).

Advertisement
Advertisement

"You were not showing this to anyone, we know the times you were showing this to Shoosmiths, you were doing it for yourself," Gunning said.

"What you are doing is tweaking parameters.. to get them to fit " the layout of the bitcoin whitepaper, Gunning added. The file was uploaded as recently as November 2023, Gunning said.

Gunning ended his questioning by asking: "Your claim to be Satoshi Nakomoto is a fraudulent claim isn't it?" which Wright disputed.

Week three

Wright's testimony capped off the third week of the trial, which saw some of COPA's witnesses took to the stand to face questioning from Wright's lawyers.

Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn, a computer scientist and the founder of Zcash, testified on Thursday where he was questioned on how well he knew Nakamoto. Wilcox said he wouldn't call himself "pals" with the pseudonymous Bitcoin creator. In court documents, he said that he was not sure if he had any private conversations with Nakamoto.

Other witnesses were more confident about their interactions with Nakamoto.

Computer scientist Marti Malmi spoke on Wednesday, disputing the dates that Wright put forward about Malmi's interaction with Nakamoto. Malmi later released his emails with Nakamoto on X (formerly Twitter).

Wright said in his witness statement that Malmi approached Nakamoto in Feb. 2009 but Malmi said in his statement this was "incorrect," and that the date was actually May 1, 2009.

Adam Back, the CEO of bitcoin technology company Blockstream, said in his first statement he corresponded with someone purporting to be Nakamoto via email.

Advertisement
Advertisement

In his statement he showed an email he received from Nakamoto on Aug. 20, 2008, where he said he planned to cite Back's paper about a proof-of-work system and Back responded by sending more resources.

Wright described Back's interactions with Nakamoto as "dismissive," which Back said was inaccurate.

Next week will see expert witnesses will be questioned.

Edited by Nikhilesh De.

Related Reads

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手12h ago

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手12h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片