英國高等法院正在進行的 COPA 程序已進入第二週，該程序涉及澳大利亞計算機科學家克雷格·賴特 (Craig Wright)，他是比特幣起源爭論的核心人物。
在激烈的質證過程中，賴特發現自己與主審法官和對方律師發生了衝突，對方律師要求他停止一連串“無關緊要的指控”，集中精力討論案件的核心問題。
COPA 審判第二週：克雷格·賴特 (Craig Wright) 的陳述
賴特的聲明和反駁一直是這一進程的焦點，該進程由加密貨幣開放專利聯盟（COPA）發起，這是一個由加密貨幣行業知名人士支持的非營利組織。
COPA 聲稱克雷格·賴特（Craig Wright）進行了「工業規模」的偽造，試圖證明自己是比特幣的創造者（化名中本聰）。
在審判期間，克雷格·賴特繼續將其論點不一致的責任歸咎於各種個人和實體。
這種趨勢在他最近的盤問中得到了延續，賴特對加密貨幣社區的成員提出了新的指控，同時面臨著在法庭上提供相互矛盾的敘述的指控。
當賴特指責 COPA 成員實施「金錢上下波動的騙局」時，雙方的言論達到了頂峰，促使主審法官詹姆斯·梅勒介入。
梅勒提醒賴特，此案的目標是確定他是否真正是中本聰，並強調比特幣系統當前狀態的爭論與訴訟程序無關。
儘管賴特試圖透過將不一致歸咎於外部因素（例如第三方編輯的錯誤歸因錯誤以及他前妻與疾病的鬥爭）來轉移審查，但對方律師、Bird & Bird LLP 的喬納森·霍夫（Jonathan Hough）仍然冷漠地質疑賴特的觀點。索賠。
賴特之前的證詞之間的不一致之處
賴特先前的證詞與他目前關於比特幣歷史關鍵事件的說法之間存在明顯差異，這引發了霍夫關於賴特帳戶一致性的具體問題。
一個值得注意的案例涉及賴特的聲明，即他在 2009 年比特幣誕生時並沒有高度重視，這與他之前關於他參與比特幣創建的聲明相矛盾。
賴特表示，他認為比特幣只是一種獲得合作關係或教授職位的潛在方式，淡化了他在比特幣發展中的作用。
However, Hough’s examination of Wright’s testimony revealed inconsistencies and contradictions, highlighting the challenges that Wright must face to prove his claims. Despite Wright’s insistence on the truthfulness of his account, the evolving nature of his statements raises doubts about their reliability.
In addition, Wright’s announcement of the discovery of a new “box” of evidence, presumably brought to light by his wife, adds an additional level of complexity to the process.
This development can prolong the process and further complicate the evaluation of the evidence presented by both parties.
As Wright’s cross-examination extends to the fifth day, the court remains focused on uncovering the truth behind his statements.
The incessant examination by the opposing lawyer and the presiding judge underscores the importance of this trial in determining the legitimacy of Wright’s claim as the inventor of Bitcoin.
Regardless of the outcome, the process represents a crucial moment in the ongoing saga about the origins of Bitcoin, shedding light on the complexities and controversies inherent in the realm of cryptocurrencies.
As Wright’s testimony continues to undergo intense scrutiny, the court’s verdict will have far-reaching implications for the future of Bitcoin and the broader crypto ecosystem.
What does Craig Wright’s COPA process entail for the entire crypto ecosystem
Beyond the judicial drama, the trial also highlights broader implications for the cryptocurrency industry and the concept of intellectual property within decentralized ecosystems.
The legal challenge of COPA against Wright reflects a concerted effort within the cryptocurrency community to protect innovation and prevent the exploitation of fundamental technologies for personal purposes.
At the center of the issue lies the problem of the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto and the legacy of Bitcoin’s creation. Since the birth of Bitcoin, the enigmatic figure of Nakamoto has captured the imagination of enthusiasts and scholars.
The prospect of unmasking Nakamoto has fueled intense speculation and debate, with Wright’s claim of the pseudonym sparking controversy and skepticism within the cryptographic community.
The outcome of the process has significant consequences for the credibility and legitimacy of Wright’s claims and for the broader perception of the origins of Bitcoin. If Wright fails to prove his claims in court, this could undermine his credibility and raise doubts about his role in the creation of Bitcoin.
On the contrary, a favorable verdict for Wright could strengthen his reputation and potentially reshape the narrative about the birth of Bitcoin.
In addition, the process highlights the difficulties of establishing ownership and intellectual property rights within decentralized systems like Bitcoin.
與受集中機構和法律框架管轄的傳統形式的智慧財產權不同，加密貨幣在優先考慮去中心化和透明度的分散式網路上運作。
因此，確定這些系統中的所有權和親子關係提出了傳統法律機制可能難以解決的獨特挑戰。
結論
無論該過程的結果如何，它都不太可能最終解決有關比特幣起源的爭論。圍繞中本聰身分的謎團注定會持續存在，讓密碼學界的猜測和陰謀永久化。
然而，這個過程代表了探索比特幣歷史和加密貨幣領域更廣泛演進的關鍵時刻。
隨著對賴特的盤問繼續，焦點仍然集中在法庭訴訟上。 Wright 和 COPA 之間的法律鬥爭概括了揭開比特幣創造之謎所涉及的緊張局勢和複雜性。
無論審判最終使敘述變得清晰還是進一步複雜化，其意義都超越了法庭，塑造了密碼學界內外的看法和討論。
歸根結底，這個過程代表了比特幣起源傳奇中的關鍵時刻，見證了圍繞世界上最著名的加密貨幣的魅力和爭議。
在此過程中，觀察者和參與者正在等待裁決，該裁決將對整個加密貨幣領域產生影響，影響未來幾年的看法、敘述和辯論。
