Man who claims to be Bitcoin creator eyes lawsuit against Apple

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in macOS
The Bitcoin whitepaper was recently discovered to be embedded in several versions of macOS, and now a person who claims to be the creator of Bitcoin is accusing Apple of copyright violation.

Latest Bitcoin controversy
Latest Bitcoin controversy


Just two days ago, on April 5, a Mac user discovered the technical document describing the Bitcoin cryptocurrency as well as blockchain technology on their computer. It's found on every modern Mac operating system by typing in a command in Terminal.

The document, authored by pseudonymous creator of the Bitcoin blockchain Satoshi Nakamoto, was written in 2008 to kick-start a decentralized peer-to-peer electronic payment system that boomed in recent years.

Recently, spurred on by a Tweet, someone has come forward implying that Apple has breached copyright law by including the PDF document in macOS, according to Finbold. The man is Craig Wright, who occasionally appears in cryptocurrency news.

Yes

-- Dr Craig S Wright (@Dr_CSWright)


Wright has claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto since an article was written about him in 2015. The identity of Nakamoto has famously remained unknown, although many tried to identify the person.

Who is Craig Wright?

Since Wired wrote its article in 2015 proclaiming Wright to be the inventor of Bitcoin and has since doubted its hypothesis, Wright has since doubled down, suing anybody who denied he invented Bitcoin under English libel law.

The Bitcoin whitepaper in macOS
The Bitcoin whitepaper in macOS


Although he promised in 2016 to give proof of his claim as the creator, he has yet to do so. Specifically, he has failed to provide proof of ownership of Nakamoto's Bitcoin address -- known as the Genesis address -- in a manner that satisfies experts.

Although Wright has yet to file a formal lawsuit against Apple, it's unlikely he will succeed since he still has to provide irrefutable evidence that he is indeed the creator of Bitcoin. Given the nature of the document, it's also unclear if any copyright law applies.

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 32
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,783member
    Although Wright has yet to file a formal lawsuit against Apple, it's unlikely he will succeed since he still has to provide irrefutable evidence that he is indeed the creator of Bitcoin. Given the nature of the document, it's also unclear if any copyright law applies
    If there is a lawsuit, it would be in the hope of shoring up his claim to be the Bitcoin creator, which is looking to be on very shaky ground. 
    watto_cobraradarthekatbyronl
  • Reply 2 of 32
    spliff monkeyspliff monkey Posts: 884member
    because an unused sample white paper appeared in macOS? FFS Attention seeking, fame fucker. Even if he had proof he was the author it would still be a very dubious case. Without proof it sounds like a grift from a former president who's about to be a convicted felon. Humanity really needs a reboot. 
    OferdavDAalsethbageljoeywatto_cobraradarthekatdewmebonobob
  • Reply 3 of 32
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,783member
    spliff monkey said:
    Humanity really needs a reboot. 
    Some days I’m pretty sure Humanity is well on the way to getting one. 
    Maybe next time it’ll be intelligent cephalopods. 
    watto_cobraradarthekatbyronl
  • Reply 4 of 32
    cambercamber Posts: 20member
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    bloggerblogwatto_cobrah2pbyronlnetrox
  • Reply 5 of 32
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,464member
    Where was he when authorities were looking for him?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 32
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    If Apple is in the mix you know there’s a lawsuit coming.
    watto_cobramacxpress
  • Reply 7 of 32
    jaywordjayword Posts: 14member
    English courts decreed several months ago that it is completely valid to call him a fraud and there is no basis for his claims. To go up against Apple's legal team given the endless amount of information proving he is a fraud would be comical.
    williamhwatto_cobraForumPosttenthousandthingsradarthekatbyronlnetrox
  • Reply 8 of 32
    1348513485 Posts: 347member
    camber said:
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    That is incorrect. Adding the symbol or any other copyright notice is no longer necessary to receive protection. 
    edited April 2023 StrangeDaysradarthekatgorbagbonobob
  • Reply 9 of 32
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,123member
    Wow so many clowns who claim to know somethign about copyright law.
    camber said:
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    Wrong. It is not necessary to include the (c) symbol to sue someone for infringement. Including the symbol is beneficial to the copyright holder because, among other things, it precludes certain defenses.

    because an unused sample white paper appeared in macOS? FFS Attention seeking, fame fucker. Even if he had proof he was the author it would still be a very dubious case. Without proof it sounds like a grift from a former president who's about to be a convicted felon. Humanity really needs a reboot. 
    What makes it "dubious" if he can prove he is the author?  What element of a copyright infringement claim is missing here?  


    Although Wright has yet to file a formal lawsuit against Apple, it's unlikely he will succeed since he still has to provide irrefutable evidence that he is indeed the creator of Bitcoin. Given the nature of the document, it's also unclear if any copyright law applies.

    No, he only needs to prove he is the author. Fictious names and pseudonyms may be used, and the author is still entitled to copyright protection.  

    He also doesn't need to prove that he invented Bitcoin. All he needs to prove is that he wrote the article. 






    edited April 2023 byronldewme
  • Reply 10 of 32
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,198member
    Fair warning! If he filed for a copyright, then he may be entitled to triple the $0 in damages he has suffered.
    edited April 2023 StrangeDayswatto_cobraradarthekatbyronldewmemacxpressbonobob
  • Reply 11 of 32
    lesterkrimbaughlesterkrimbaugh Posts: 54member
    So this is the guy everyone is going to sue for starting the Bitcoin Ponzi scheme?
    DAalsethwatto_cobraForumPostradarthekatmangakattentokyojimu
  • Reply 12 of 32
    verne araseverne arase Posts: 460member
    Just remove the damned thing.

    There's enough cruft in the OS as it is.
    watto_cobraradarthekat
  • Reply 13 of 32
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,031member
    flydog said:
    Wow so many clowns who claim to know somethign about copyright law.
    camber said:
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    Wrong. It is not necessary to include the (c) symbol to sue someone for infringement. Including the symbol is beneficial to the copyright holder because, among other things, it precludes certain defenses.

    because an unused sample white paper appeared in macOS? FFS Attention seeking, fame fucker. Even if he had proof he was the author it would still be a very dubious case. Without proof it sounds like a grift from a former president who's about to be a convicted felon. Humanity really needs a reboot. 
    What makes it "dubious" if he can prove he is the author?  What element of a copyright infringement claim is missing here?  


    Although Wright has yet to file a formal lawsuit against Apple, it's unlikely he will succeed since he still has to provide irrefutable evidence that he is indeed the creator of Bitcoin. Given the nature of the document, it's also unclear if any copyright law applies.

    No, he only needs to prove he is the author. Fictious names and pseudonyms may be used, and the author is still entitled to copyright protection.  

    He also doesn't need to prove that he invented Bitcoin. All he needs to prove is that he wrote the article. 






    Copyright law applies here. Clearly, the article is copyrighted by default. It needs to be registered to bring a suite. But this article has been out in the wild for 15 years. We’ve all copied it by now. A successful suite must be brought within 3 years of infringement. It think that has passed? 

    Clearly only the author can register for copyright protection, so Wright needs to prove he is the author. Not likely.

    Finally, the way it was published makes it arguable that it was meant to be in the public domain. Fair use at least. One key element is if way back 15 years ago, if someone want to get permission to copy this work, there must have been a way to ask for permission. That has proven impossible. 
    watto_cobraradarthekatmangakatten
  • Reply 14 of 32
    clemynxclemynx Posts: 1,552member
    flydog said:
    Wow so many clowns who claim to know somethign about copyright law.
    camber said:
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    Wrong. It is not necessary to include the (c) symbol to sue someone for infringement. Including the symbol is beneficial to the copyright holder because, among other things, it precludes certain defenses.

    because an unused sample white paper appeared in macOS? FFS Attention seeking, fame fucker. Even if he had proof he was the author it would still be a very dubious case. Without proof it sounds like a grift from a former president who's about to be a convicted felon. Humanity really needs a reboot. 
    What makes it "dubious" if he can prove he is the author?  What element of a copyright infringement claim is missing here?  


    Although Wright has yet to file a formal lawsuit against Apple, it's unlikely he will succeed since he still has to provide irrefutable evidence that he is indeed the creator of Bitcoin. Given the nature of the document, it's also unclear if any copyright law applies.

    No, he only needs to prove he is the author. Fictious names and pseudonyms may be used, and the author is still entitled to copyright protection.  

    He also doesn't need to prove that he invented Bitcoin. All he needs to prove is that he wrote the article. 






    This comment read with an annoying voice in my head. 
    edited April 2023 watto_cobrabyronl
  • Reply 15 of 32
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 764member
    Apple should not fight this but go to trial. Then ask him to unlock Satoshi Nakamoto crypto wallet. Very unlikely to be Wright. 
    watto_cobraradarthekatbyronl
  • Reply 16 of 32
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,050member
    flydog said:
    Wow so many clowns who claim to know somethign about copyright law.
    camber said:
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    Wrong. It is not necessary to include the (c) symbol to sue someone for infringement. Including the symbol is beneficial to the copyright holder because, among other things, it precludes certain defenses.

    because an unused sample white paper appeared in macOS? FFS Attention seeking, fame fucker. Even if he had proof he was the author it would still be a very dubious case. Without proof it sounds like a grift from a former president who's about to be a convicted felon. Humanity really needs a reboot. 
    What makes it "dubious" if he can prove he is the author?  What element of a copyright infringement claim is missing here?  


    Although Wright has yet to file a formal lawsuit against Apple, it's unlikely he will succeed since he still has to provide irrefutable evidence that he is indeed the creator of Bitcoin. Given the nature of the document, it's also unclear if any copyright law applies.

    No, he only needs to prove he is the author. Fictious names and pseudonyms may be used, and the author is still entitled to copyright protection.  

    He also doesn't need to prove that he invented Bitcoin. All he needs to prove is that he wrote the article. 






    I'm glad you aren't one of those clowns that claim to know everything about copyright laws. But you seem to have forgotten a very important fact about registering a copyright. Without the registered mark, the owner of the copyright can not sue for infringement. They can however still prevent someone from using their work, after proving ownership of the work and notifying the alleged infringer.  

    https://aaronhall.com/why-you-must-register-a-copyright/

    Unless this guy register his work, he's not entitle to sue for copyright infringement. And in order to register this paper, he must prove he's the author. Just claiming to be the author is not enough to sue Apple for copyright infringement. 
    radarthekatnetrox
  • Reply 17 of 32
    BlueLightningBlueLightning Posts: 128member
    Wonder how much free advertising Apple gets out of this?  

    Wonder if supposed author can now be taken to court by folks who have lost money on anything crypto related?  
    edited April 2023 radarthekat
  • Reply 18 of 32
    tenthousandthingstenthousandthings Posts: 1,036member
    I encountered these some years ago when trying to troubleshoot something (I can’t remember what it was). The scanned image of the photograph kept reappearing in Image Capture despite my attempts to delete it. I did an image search to find out what it was, just out of curiosity and annoyance. I thought maybe it was something I had scanned long ago (I work with lots of images). It eventually dawned on me that it was some kind of built-in test image. I remember encountering the bitcoin paper as well, but I can’t say I thought anything about it. 

    On Craig Wright, LOL. His posturing about this just confirms he’s not the founder. I could make a stronger case that this proves Satoshi Nakamoto was an Apple software engineer…
    radarthekatmangakatten
  • Reply 19 of 32
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,571member
    The Onion Router (aka Tor, aka Dark Web) was created by the US government in 2002 and I see parallels between it and Bitcoin. 
    watto_cobrabonobob
  • Reply 20 of 32
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    camber said:
    The document itself contains no Copyright—the word Copyright does not appear in the document nor the © symbol, no date of copyright and no individual/company who owns the copyright. These are three more impediments to a successful copyright suite against Apple. Furthermore, although Apple has deep pockets and is therefore a 'good' target for such a suite, copyright provides the least protection of all the intellectual property laws. He can threaten all he likes but a successful suit is highly unlikely!
    And even if he proves himself to be the document creator and proves copyright infringement, then comes the matter of damages.  Without harm there can be no damage award.  What harm has come from a copy of the white paper embedded in the OS where nobody until very recently even knew it was there?  And what harm comes from its discovery.  Anyone can obtain a copy of this document from other sources.  Most prominently, straight from Bitcoin.org.  No charge.  I’m scrolling through it on my ipad as I write this comment on my iPhone.  
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.