Inventor of Bitcoin and Satoshi Nakamoto Disciple Wins Legal Battle, Takes Home $56 Billion

The rise of Bitcoin is one of the most intriguing and mysterious stories of our decade. In late 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto released Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. For many Bitcoin enthusiasts, discovering Nakamoto’s identity is still the ultimate goal.

Answers might be found in a recent Florida lawsuit. Ira Kleiman v. Craig Wright asserts that Satoshi Nakamoto is Craig Steven Wright. Wright owes David Kleiman’s estate 50% of the 1.1 million bitcoins he owned at the time, which were worth $56 billion. Wright was awarded custody of the bitcoins after the jury found in his favor.

the first bitcoins. Does that support Wright’s assertion that he invented the most well-known cryptocurrency? The riddle of Nakamoto: answered? With $50 billion in the bank, do Wright or the bitcoin community care?

David Kleiman and Craig Wright

Even though the case involved money, some who are interested in cryptocurrencies and fintech saw wider ramifications. A technological puzzle is resolved if Wright created Bitcoin, the most valuable and widely used cryptocurrency.

Who is concerned?

Craig Wright is a security and IT expert. He is a well-known Bitcoin author and speaker. He taught computer science in Australia and holds more than 3000 patents related to the blockchain.

Advertisement

Expert in both IT and cryptography, David Kleiman. NASA, the Postal Service, and the Treasury Department all used his Windows encryption program. After more than two years in the hospital for injuries sustained in a motorcycle accident, Kleiman passed away in 2013.

Before Bitcoin was created, in the middle of the 1990s, Wright and Kleiman were friends. Beyond that, nothing is certain. This friendship was the catalyst for the case. Kleiman and Wright were formally partners in business, according to Kleiman’s family, making Kleiman eligible for financial rewards.

Wright and Kleiman operated W&K Info Defense Research LLC when they mined the disputed bitcoin in 2009. (W for Wright, K for Kleiman). In hundreds of emails to Kleiman, his family, and Australian government representatives, Wright refers to Kleiman as both his boyfriend and best friend.

Wright claimed there was no official partnership. Wright’s attorneys claim that his autism, which was only recently detected, makes it difficult for him to understand partner-level language.

Wright was found not guilty by a Florida jury of partnership breach, fraud, or civil theft. His debt to W&K for stealing its intellectual property, however, was $100 million (conversion).

What do you think? Is Wright Nakamoto?

The case’s evidence is mostly under seal. Wright’s identity as the creator of Bitcoin Nakamoto has been questioned in light of information from court records and the trial.

Shortly after Kleiman’s passing, Wright sent his father an email. “Your kid and I are two of Bitcoin’s three key individuals,” wrote Wright. He pleaded with the senior Kleiman to track down and protect Dave’s wallet, a private cryptocurrency wallet distinct from public wallets.

Advertisement

Who’s #3? Wright’s deposition testimony is confidential, but he chose not to reveal the identity of the third party due to “national security” concerns. An informant for the government had died, according to Wright. Simply put, this email and testimony raise more concerns regarding Nakamoto’s identity.

Wright’s claims are in conflict with the evidence. “Many of the emails in the case were forgeries, including one in which Wright begs Kleiman to edit a paper on electronic money,” according to one forensics expert who testified during the prosecution. The website was launched in 2011. The origin of the counterfeit is unknown.

Lack of supporting data casts doubt on Wright’s assertion. Wright hasn’t revealed that he is Nakamoto. The 2008 Nakamoto paper’s drafts are not present in any of Wright and Kleiman’s emails.

Despite promises, Wright has never demonstrated that he registered the domain name bitcoin.com in 2008, nor has he revealed Nakamoto’s private keys. Gavin Andersen, a Bitcoin engineer, claimed in court that Wright’s “gobbledygook proof” was a ruse rather than a fabrication. Wright, in Andersen’s opinion, is Nakamoto.

Not every discrepancy and query can be addressed here. The case files resemble a Dan Brown book. Despite the assertions of Wright’s attorneys, the evidence does not support the jury’s finding that Wright and Nakamoto are the same person.