# Dead Satoshi's brother is suing Craig S. Wright (who claims to be Satoshi) for 10 billion dollars



## neger psykolog (Feb 27, 2018)

TLDR:



> Satoshi Nakamoto created bitcoin, no one verifiably knows who they are. They've been credited with changing the very nature of economics forever (pretty much the most significant invention since the printing press)
> SN conceivably owns upwards of 1 million bitcoins ($10 billion US)
> Dave Kleiman was a reclusive computer scientist who focused on security. He was supposedly an alcoholic and ended up dying on a mattress in his own feces or something.
> Dave Kleiman profile piece: https://gizmodo.com/the-strange-life-and-death-of-dave-kleiman-a-computer-1747092460
> ...


Today what has happened:

Ira Kleiman, the brother of Dave Kleiman has filed a lawsuit against CSW on behalf of her dead brother's estate claiming that CSW fraudulently claimed the $10 billion US by making up a fake tulip trust among other things
This is a hugely significant event in cryptocurrency history if Dave Kleiman holds any proof that he was Satoshi. An amount of 1 million BTC can be used to either rapidly destabilize the project or to strengthen it.

If CSW gets verifiably proven (unlikely) as Bitcoin's creator or as a significant contributor to Bitcoin it will mean that Bitcoin once again has someone leading it which will mean people may actually start to agree on how to move things forward.

As the currency is difficult to trace (although not fully anonymous/untraceable) it also means that any government/organized crime element would be able to steal/murder/blackmail/extort anyone holding such a sum in order to try and influence the project in ways that they would like.



> Craig Wright, the nChain chief scientist who previously claimed to be the pseudonymous bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, is being sued for a whopping $10 billion.
> 
> The lawsuit is being brought by Ira Kleiman on behalf of the estate of his brother, Dave, who has been linked to the earliest days of bitcoin. Kleiman, a forensic computer investigator and author, passed away in 2013 following a battle with MRSA.
> 
> ...


https://www.coindesk.com/satoshi-craig-wright-sued-10-billion/

Legal complaint:
https://www.scribd.com/document/372465601/

@Null I'll probably make a legal thread on this later if its ok, because it'll be interesting to follow

EDIT: Ira is his brother, not sister. Edited to reflect that.


----------



## neger psykolog (Feb 27, 2018)

Armchair opinion here, but perhaps this is an effort by Craig to get cited as Bitcoin's creator:




https://twitter.com/ProfFaustus/status/968197704936550400?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

It may be that by getting this proven by a court, and without proving it via an encryption key he might score big reputation points.


----------



## CrunkLord420 (Feb 27, 2018)

Satoshi being a real identifiable person is bad for BTC. It's best if he is effectively dead. Even if a judge says something, I don't think the community will accept anything other than the original keys.


----------



## Null (Feb 27, 2018)

CrunkLord420 said:


> Satoshi being a real identifiable person is bad for BTC. It's best if he is effectively dead. Even if a judge says something, I don't think the community will accept anything other than the original keys.


It'd be best if he did indeed die on a mattress to alcohol poisoning a long, long time ago with computers wiped and donated to Good Will.


----------



## Piss Clam (Feb 27, 2018)

Satoshi Nakamoto = NSA.

http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm


----------



## LastOfTheMohicans (Feb 27, 2018)

I'd like to think that whoever Satoshi is, they destroyed their publically associated private keys.


----------



## AnOminous (Feb 27, 2018)

I think it's more likely to have been Hal Finney or some group involving him.


----------



## neger psykolog (Feb 27, 2018)

AnOminous said:


> I think it's more likely to have been Hal Finney or some group involving him.



I think the general agreement is that its most likely Nick Szabo but he doesn't give a fuck.



CrunkLord420 said:


> Satoshi being a real identifiable person is bad for BTC. It's best if he is effectively dead. Even if a judge says something, I don't think the community will accept anything other than the original keys.



Well here is where the autism starts, supposedly his Bitcoin + keys were stored in a storage device which he kept around his neck. There is no remote possibility they were left unencrypted because he was into security stuff.

So its going to be extremely difficult to prove either side of the story.


----------



## AnOminous (Feb 27, 2018)

neger psykolog said:


> I think the general agreement is that its most likely Nick Szabo but he doesn't give a fuck.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It would require negative proof, i.e. someone else signing a message from the key that generated the genesis block or some other undisputed Satoshi coin.


----------



## neger psykolog (Feb 28, 2018)

This blog by WizSec claims that the majority of the addresses mentioned actually belong to Mt.Gox related people:



https://blog.wizsec.jp/2018/02/kleiman-v-craig-wright-bitcoins.html


----------



## AnOminous (Feb 28, 2018)

Why is this even a story without a single signature?


----------



## neger psykolog (Feb 28, 2018)

AnOminous said:


> Why is this even a story without a single signature?



Because I'm being optimistic and hoping that a court compels Craig to unencrypt his drives whereupon he refuses and voluntarily sits in a prison for the next 200 years for violating a court order. There is a lot of legal argument for/against that notion, but its at least a remote possibility that might provide some entertainment.

Besides that it will be interesting to see what the court makes of it, especially as its such a significant amount of bitcoin and because court cases involving bitcoin are not that frequent.


----------



## Begemot (Feb 28, 2018)

neger psykolog said:


> Because I'm being optimistic and hoping that a court compels Craig to unencrypt his drives whereupon he refuses and voluntarily sits in a prison for the next 200 years for violating a court order. There is a lot of legal argument for/against that notion, but its at least a remote possibility that might provide some entertainment.
> 
> Besides that it will be interesting to see what the court makes of it, especially as its such a significant amount of bitcoin and because court cases involving bitcoin are not that frequent.


Will they be able to extradite him from Australia?


----------



## neger psykolog (Feb 28, 2018)

chekovia said:


> Will they be able to extradite him from Australia?



I'm actually not 100% certain where he is located at the moment. There is some indication its the UK or possibly US.

A lot of prominent Bitcoin people earn their money by attending/speaking at conferences around the world, so he probably has no fixed residence at the moment.

The company he works for/with is nChain which is located in London.


----------



## Begemot (Feb 28, 2018)

neger psykolog said:


> I'm actually not 100% certain where he is located at the moment. There is some indication its the UK or possibly US.
> 
> A lot of prominent Bitcoin people earn their money by attending/speaking at conferences around the world, so he probably has no fixed residence at the moment.
> 
> The company he works for/with is nChain which is located in London.


Actually, considering he was raided by the Federal Police for taxes I'd be surprised if he isn't in Australia:
https://www.smh.com.au/business/bitcoin-founder-could-definitely-be-australian-20151209-gljc73.html


----------

