克雷格·赖特（Craig Wright）下令支付225,000英镑的罚款，以滥用AI上诉早期裁决

澳大利亚计算机科学家克雷格·赖特（Craig Wright）声称自己是纳卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto），被伦敦法院罚款225,000英镑

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.

一位澳大利亚计算机科学家克雷格·赖特（Craig Wright）因声称是纳卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto）的说法而闻名，伦敦法院命令向加密货币集团（Crypto Groups）支付225,000英镑的法律费用，以免使用人工智能（AI）（AI），同时试图对高级法院提出上诉，以免高等法院对他不是Satoshi Nakamoto宣布为Satoshi Nakamoto申请Satoshi Nakamoto，以示为晚上的标准。

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，伦敦法院裁定赖特不是萨托西，在审判期间撒谎。他还被禁止对加密货币行业提出更多法律案件。

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.

由伦敦法院辩护的加密公开专利联盟（COPA）和其他比特币集团要求上诉法院要求赖特支付其法律费用。

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.

周四，阿诺德勋爵裁定，赖特将支付100,000英镑来支付Copa的费用，而其他加密开发商的费用为125,000英镑。法官说，由于赖特的上诉缺乏优点，因此罚款是适当的。

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

根据阿诺德勋爵（Lord Arnold）的说法，上诉人申请的叙事结构并不是提出当前申请的不变因素。

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 Still in its infancy regarding legal defence, the AI model used out-of-date case law to present Wright’s appeal.

据说赖特使用AI模型来构成他的吸引力。由于AI的过度使用，他的写作被震撼了，有时与当前案件无关。 AI模型仍处于起步阶段，但使用过时的判例法来介绍赖特的上诉。

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.

阿诺德勋爵（Lord Arnold）主持了涉及加密货币发明家克雷格·赖特（Craig Wright）的案件，他拒绝了赖特（Wright）的申请，要求其允许去年的高等法院裁定赖特（Wright）不是比特币的创造者。

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.

阿诺德·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，赖特因temp视法庭的temp视中被判处12个月的徒刑，因为他发出了与比特币有关的9000亿英镑的新索赔，即使法院禁止他进一步提出任何案件。

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).

上诉法院周四的裁决可能是第一个因滥用人工智能（AI）而被命令支付费用的案件。

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.

还报道说，美洲杯要求法院针对赖特发布民事限制令（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的乔纳森·霍夫（Jonathan Hough KC）说，赖特（Wright）滥用了法律制度，以“恐吓”他所感知的敌人。

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

霍夫进一步要求总检察长将约束令从3年扩展到更长的时间。

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

霍夫写道：“首先，赖特博士提出了许多毫无根据的法律诉讼。”霍夫说：“建立在谎言上并以大量的伪造为后盾”。

“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，在那些行动中，他声称对许多个人和公司造成了巨额资金，造成了严重的困扰，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，他的行动已经占据了非常重要的法院资源，在该司法管辖区的近100个法院日都持续了。”

“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”.

“他的主张的无可争议的后果是在一个重要行业中对创新的重大破坏，有明显而严重的风险，他以一种或另一种形式重复他的诉讼运动”。

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的鸟与鸟伴侣菲尔·谢雷尔（Phil Sherrell）表示，赖特（Wright）对AI的使用导致了许多虚假的陈述和使用止于判例法。

“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”.

谢雷尔说：“这是对诉讼人的严重警告。