bitcoin
bitcoin

$96504.726592 USD

-4.74%

ethereum
ethereum

$3349.285822 USD

-9.05%

tether
tether

$0.999209 USD

-0.02%

xrp
xrp

$2.259641 USD

-4.61%

bnb
bnb

$667.401235 USD

-5.03%

solana
solana

$190.617761 USD

-9.37%

dogecoin
dogecoin

$0.313848 USD

-13.57%

usd-coin
usd-coin

$0.999983 USD

0.00%

cardano
cardano

$0.881617 USD

-10.34%

tron
tron

$0.248024 USD

-5.83%

avalanche
avalanche

$38.666631 USD

-9.46%

chainlink
chainlink

$22.509746 USD

-8.78%

toncoin
toncoin

$5.207296 USD

-4.45%

shiba-inu
shiba-inu

$0.000022 USD

-10.62%

sui
sui

$3.944066 USD

-10.20%

加密货币新闻

澳大利亚克雷格·赖特因冒充比特币发明者“中本聪”被判处一年监禁

2024/12/20 06:06

澳大利亚人克雷格·赖特并不是比特币发明者“中本聪”。这是英国法院于三月份确立的。

澳大利亚克雷格·赖特因冒充比特币发明者“中本聪”被判处一年监禁

Australian Craig Wright, who claims to be the inventor of Bitcoin under the pseudonym "Satoshi Nakamoto," has been sentenced to one year in prison by an English court for filing further lawsuits despite being prohibited from doing so.

澳大利亚人克雷格·赖特(Craig Wright)以笔名“中本聪”自称是比特币的发明者,他因在被禁止的情况下提起进一步诉讼而被英国法院判处一年监禁。

The sentence was handed down on Thursday and is suspended for two years. However, Wright must pay 145,000 pounds in legal costs within two weeks.

该判决于周四作出,缓刑两年。然而,赖特必须在两周内支付 145,000 英镑的法律费用。

The court had previously established that Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto, a claim that was central to four of the five lawsuits he filed.

法院此前已确定赖特不是中本聪,这一主张是他提起的五起诉讼中的四起诉讼的核心。

In a fourth lawsuit, the industry association COPA sued Wright, seeking a declaration that he is not Sakomoto (case no. IL-2021-000019). This was to ensure that Wright stopped harassing people from the Bitcoin orbit.

在第四起诉讼中,行业协会 COPA 起诉 Wright,要求声明他不是 Sakomoto(案件编号:IL-2021-000019)。这是为了确保赖特停止骚扰比特币轨道上的人们。

In a fifth action (Ref. BL-2021-000313), brought on behalf of Wright's company Tulip Trading Limiteds, Wright sought to require Bitcoin programmers to manipulate the blockchain to recover 111,000 Bitcoin that had been lost. Mr. Sakamoto's identity played no role in these proceedings. An appeals court found last year that the blockchain manipulation claim was not hopeless, but Wright has since dropped the lawsuit.

在代表 Wright 的公司 Tulip Trading Limiteds 提起的第五项诉讼(参考号 BL-2021-000313)中,Wright 试图要求比特币程序员操纵区块链,以找回丢失的 111,000 个比特币。坂本先生的身份在这些诉讼中没有发挥任何作用。上诉法院去年裁定,区块链操纵指控并非毫无希望,但赖特此后放弃了诉讼。

Despite being prohibited from filing further lawsuits, Wright continued to do so, prompting COPA to apply for a conviction for contempt of court, which was ultimately granted.

尽管被禁止提起进一步诉讼,赖特仍继续这样做,促使 COPA 申请藐视法庭定罪,并最终获得批准。

In his new lawsuit, Wright is again asserting intellectual property claims, this time to the value of 911 billion pounds (a good 1.1 trillion euros).

在他的新诉讼中,赖特再次提出知识产权主张,这次的价值为 9110 亿英镑(相当于 1.1 万亿欧元)。

The court found that Wright's new lawsuit is indirectly claiming that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, as only Nakamoto could, if at all, claim the allegedly infringed rights.

法院认为,赖特的新诉讼间接声称他是中本聪,因为只有中本聪才能主张所涉嫌侵犯的权利。

Additionally, the court's previous order prohibits Wright from asserting a list of intellectual property claims relating to Bitcoin at all, regardless of whether he is directly claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

此外,法院之前的命令禁止 Wright 提出一系列与比特币相关的知识产权主张,无论他是否直接声称自己是中本聪。

Thus, Wright was convicted of contempt of court for filing the new lawsuit despite being prohibited from doing so.

因此,赖特在被禁止的情况下仍因提起新诉讼而被判藐视法庭罪。

Throughout the proceedings, Wright has not made any friends in court with his fisticuffs. Not only does he repeatedly put forward legally untenable arguments, he also violates the procedural rules.

在整个诉讼过程中,赖特没有在法庭上用拳头交到任何朋友。他不仅屡屡提出法律上站不住脚的论点,而且还违反了程序规则。

For example, he has lodged an appeal directly with the Court of Appeal, although it should be lodged with the court of first instance. He has also served documents on defendants abroad without the required authorization.

例如,他直接向上诉法院提出上诉,尽管应向初审法院提出上诉。他还未经必要授权向国外被告送达文件。

In addition, Wright has repeatedly accused the judge of bias. The central element of this allegation is apparently a typo in a tweet by a third party. According to this, the judge is said to have attended a COPA event, i.e. one of the plaintiff's events – not in itself a reason for bias. However, he was actually referring to CIPA, an organization of British patent attorneys. The judge noted that he had never been to a COPA event and rejected the claim of bias.

此外,赖特还多次指责法官存在偏见。这项指控的核心要素显然是第三方推文中的拼写错误。据此,据说法官参加了 COPA 活动,即原告的活动之一,这本身并不是偏见的原因。然而,他实际上指的是英国专利律师组织 CIPA。法官指出,他从未参加过 COPA 赛事,并驳回了存在偏见的说法。

The current judgment of the England and Wales High Court can be cited as [2024] EWHC 3315 (Ch), the case number is IL-2021-000019. The court documents are subject to the Open Government Licence 3.0.

英格兰及威尔士高等法院目前的判决可引用为[2024] EWHC 3315 (Ch),案号为IL-2021-000019。法庭文件受开放政府许可证 3.0 的约束。

(ds)

(ds)

Don't miss any news – follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn or Mastodon.

不要错过任何新闻 – 在 Facebook、LinkedIn 或 Mastodon 上关注我们。

This article was originally published in German. It was translated with technical assistance and editorially reviewed before publication.

本文最初以德文发表。它是在技术援助下翻译的,并在出版前经过编辑审查。

新闻来源:www.heise.de

免责声明:info@kdj.com

The information provided is not trading advice. kdj.com does not assume any responsibility for any investments made based on the information provided in this article. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile and it is highly recommended that you invest with caution after thorough research!

If you believe that the content used on this website infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately (info@kdj.com) and we will delete it promptly.

2024年12月20日 发表的其他文章