[HN Gopher] Craig Wright wins another appeal against Dorsey, Blo...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Craig Wright wins another appeal against Dorsey, Block, BTC
       developers, et al.
        
       Author : merrycherry
       Score  : 6 points
       Date   : 2023-07-20 21:19 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk)
        
       | nullc wrote:
       | Hope no one here is using open source software from the UK or
       | distributing open source software which eventually ends up in the
       | UK--
       | 
       | Because the UK court of appeals thinks it's okay, in effect, if
       | people are forced to undertake millions of dollars in costs going
       | to a full trial over a claim that they were violating the
       | copyright of the file format of an MIT licensed piece of
       | software, initiated by a person who (fraudulently, in this case)
       | claims to be the initial author of the software.
       | 
       | At first instance the claimant here danced around disclosing that
       | the file format was originally distributed as part of the
       | software (presumably as it would have opened him up to having his
       | case discarded on the basis that our use of it was unambiguously
       | licensed)-- causing the trial court to throw out the claim on the
       | basis that a work must be fixated in a durable form to be
       | eligible for copyright protection. The claimant appealed, and the
       | appeals court allowed the claim to move forward.
        
       | smoldesu wrote:
       | > Having considered the matter on paper, Mellor J was satisfied
       | that it was appropriate to grant the Claimants permission to
       | serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction in respect of all
       | the causes of action relied upon except for the claim for
       | infringement of copyright in the Bitcoin File Format.
       | 
       | > He was doubtful whether the Claimants had a real prospect of
       | success in establishing that copyright subsisted in the Bitcoin
       | File Format. He invited the Claimants to file further written
       | submissions and/or evidence addressing the following question:
       | "when and in what form the alleged literary work in the Bitcoin
       | File Format was first recorded, in writing or otherwise".
       | 
       | > In response to this question the Claimants filed a second
       | witness statement of Dr Wright. The judge was not satisfied that
       | this evidence established there was a serious issue to be tried,
       | but he gave the Claimants the opportunity to persuade him
       | otherwise at an oral hearing on 3 February 2023. Following the
       | hearing, the judge remained unpersuaded for the reasons he
       | explained in his judgment.
       | 
       | His big "win" is getting kicked to the curb because personal
       | testimony amounts to nothing.
       | 
       | > There is a common issue in all four claims: what has been
       | called "the identity issue", namely, whether it was Dr Wright who
       | adopted the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto when announcing the
       | creation of the Bitcoin system. That issue will be determined at
       | a trial fixed for hearing in January 2024.
       | 
       | At least he's got a couple months to 'remember' up some more
       | evidence.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-20 23:02 UTC)