克雷格·賴特（Craig Wright）下令支付225,000英鎊的罰款，以濫用AI上訴早期裁決

澳大利亞計算機科學家克雷格·賴特（Craig Wright）聲稱自己是納卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto），被倫敦法院罰款225,000英鎊

An Australian computer scientist, Craig Wright, known for his claims of being Satoshi Nakamoto, was ordered by a London court to pay £225,000 in legal costs to crypto groups for improperly using artificial intelligence (AI) while attempting to appeal an earlier ruling by the High Court that he is not Satoshi Nakamoto, reports Sipo Li for the Evening Standard.

一位澳大利亞計算機科學家克雷格·賴特（Craig Wright）因聲稱是納卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto）的說法而聞名，倫敦法院命令向加密貨幣集團（Crypto Groups）支付225,000英鎊的法律費用，以免使用人工智能（AI）（AI），同時試圖對高級法院提出上訴，以免高等法院對他不是Satoshi Nakamoto宣佈為Satoshi Nakamoto申請Satoshi Nakamoto，以示為晚上的標準。

In March 2024, a London court ruled that Wright was not Satoshi and had lied extensively during the trial. He was also barred from making any more legal cases against the crypto industry.

2024年3月，倫敦法院裁定賴特不是薩托西，在審判期間撒謊。他還被禁止對加密貨幣行業提出更多法律案件。

Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) and other Bitcoin groups, who were defended by the London court, asked the Court of Appeals for Wright to pay their legal costs.

由倫敦法院辯護的加密公開專利聯盟（COPA）和其他比特幣集團要求上訴法院要求賴特支付其法律費用。

On Thursday, Lord Justice Arnold ruled that Wright will pay £100,000 to cover COPA’s costs and £125,000 for the other crypto developers’ costs. The judge stated that the fines are appropriate as Wright’s appeal lacked merit.

週四，阿諾德勳爵裁定，賴特將支付100,000英鎊來支付Copa的費用，而其他加密開發商的費用為125,000英鎊。法官說，由於賴特的上訴缺乏優點，因此罰款是適當的。

According to Lord Justice Arnold, the narrative structure of the appellant’s application was not an unaltering factor in making the present application.

根據阿諾德勳爵（Lord Arnold）的說法，上訴人申請的敘事結構並不是提出當前申請的不變因素。

It was stated that Wright used AI models to compose his appeal. As a result of the AI overuse, his writing was convoluted and, at times, irrelevant to the current case. Still in its infancy regarding legal defence, the AI model used out-of-date case law to present Wright’s appeal.

據說賴特使用AI模型來構成他的吸引力。由於AI過度使用，他的著作被消除了，有時與當前案件無關。 AI模型仍處於起步階段，但使用過時的判例法來介紹賴特的上訴。

Lord Justice Arnold, who presided over cases involving cryptocurrency inventor Craig Wright, refused an application by Wright for permission to appeal last year’s High Court ruling that Wright was not the creator of Bitcoin.

阿諾德勳爵（Lord Arnold）主持了涉及加密貨幣發明家克雷格·賴特（Craig Wright）的案件，他拒絕了賴特（Wright）的申請，要求其允許去年的高等法院裁定賴特（Wright）不是比特幣的創造者。

Arnold J. held that the appeal would be incompetent because it was unnecessarily complicated and disproportionate to the case, and at risk of misleading the court with unnecessary information.

阿諾德·J（Arnold J.

In December 2024, Wright was sentenced to 12 months in prison for contempt of court for having issued a new claim of £900 billion related to Bitcoin, even though the court barred him from making any more cases.

2024年12月，賴特因temp視法庭的temp視中被判處12個月的徒刑，因為他發出了與比特幣有關的9000億英鎊的新索賠，即使法院禁止他進一步提出任何案件。

Thursday’s ruling by the Court of Appeals may be the first case in which a person is ordered to pay costs because of their misuse of artificial intelligence (AI).

上訴法院週四的裁決可能是第一個因濫用人工智能（AI）而被命令支付費用的案件。

It was also reported that COPA asked the court to issue a Civil Restraint Order (CRO) against Wright, to stop him from creating court cases for 3 years.

還報導說，美洲杯要求法院針對賴特發布民事限制令（CRO），以阻止他制定法院案件3年。

Jonathan Hough KC, representing COPA, says Wright misused the legal system to “terrorise” his perceived enemies.

代表Copa的喬納森·霍夫（Jonathan Hough KC）說，賴特（Wright）濫用了法律制度，以“恐嚇”他所感知的敵人。

Hough further requested that the Attorney General extend the restraint order from 3 years to a longer period.

霍夫進一步要求總檢察長將約束令從3年擴展到更長的時間。

“First, Dr Wright has brought a large number of baseless legal actions”, wrote Hough, “founded on lies and backed up with copious forgeries”.

霍夫寫道：“首先，賴特博士提出了許多毫無根據的法律訴訟。”霍夫說：“建立在謊言上並以大量的偽造為後盾”。

“Secondly, in those actions he has claimed huge sums against a large number of individuals and companies, causing them serious distress, inconvenience and cost”.

“其次，在那些行動中，他聲稱對許多個人和公司造成了巨額資金，造成了嚴重的困擾，不便和成本”。

“Thirdly, his actions have taken up very significant court resources, running to nearly 100 court days in this jurisdiction”.

“第三，他的行動已經佔據了非常重要的法院資源，在該司法管轄區的近100個法院日都持續了。”

“The undisputed consequence of his claims has been significant disruption to innovation in an important industry There is a clear and serious risk of him repeating his campaign of litigation in one form or another”.

“他的主張的無可爭議的後果是在一個重要行業中對創新的重大破壞，有明顯而嚴重的風險，他以一種或另一種形式重複他的訴訟運動”。

Phil Sherrell, Bird & Bird Partner, representing COPA, said Wright’s use of AI resulted in many false statements and use of out-date case law.

代表COPA的鳥與鳥伴侶菲爾·謝雷爾（Phil Sherrell）表示，賴特（Wright）對AI的使用導致了許多虛假的陳述和使用止於判例法。

“This is a stark warning to litigants”, said Sherrell, “and in particular litigants in person, about the risks of using generative AI tools to create court documents”.

謝雷爾說：“這是對訴訟人的嚴重警告。