The overseas companies owned the Australian companies.
The Australian companies did the creation of intellectual property and any activity such as bitcoin mining. Many of the activities that I did I published widely and hence the intellectual property in those has been given freely to the world.
More importantly, every single bitcoin was created on the launch of bitcoin in January 2009. At that point I was controlling a company in Australia that owned all of the just under 21 million bitcoin denominated tokens that would ever exist.
CSW
May 26, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1590505718083600?thread_ts=1590505437.082800&cid=C5131HKFX
The Australian companies did the creation of intellectual property and any activity such as bitcoin mining. Many of the activities that I did I published widely and hence the intellectual property in those has been given freely to the world.
More importantly, every single bitcoin was created on the launch of bitcoin in January 2009. At that point I was controlling a company in Australia that owned all of the just under 21 million bitcoin denominated tokens that would ever exist.
CSW
May 26, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1590505718083600?thread_ts=1590505437.082800&cid=C5131HKFX
El litigio por la creación del White Paper de BitCoin.
Por Ramon Quesada https://foro.bsvespanol.org/t/craig-es-satoshi/64/14?u=ramonquesada
Por Ramon Quesada https://foro.bsvespanol.org/t/craig-es-satoshi/64/14?u=ramonquesada
And we have now left Europe and entered the
- The Final Countdown. Europe (Official Video)
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+final+countdown&docid=607994261061043386&mid=E8A0E403467AE64DCAD4E8A0E403467AE64DCAD4&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
so far Coobieee and crew
https://t.me/joinchat/VNOTBvWDr9d8ZCTc
Did you know that the bitcoin White Paper is included in the bitcoin database.
So, BTC and BCH are publishing a copy of the White Paper
you see, I didn't publish the White Paper I distributed it
So, unauthorised use and distribution is a breach of the copyright
yes, you could create a new Genesis block but then you would still require the old Blockchain to be able to validate all of the UTXO's
and that would still require licensing
so, I guess that's frypan or fire
rock and hard place
Unfortunately, this means they not only have to prove that I'm not Satoshi (i.e. try prove the truth is a lie) but also demonstrate that my version of bitcoin as I originally envisioned it before I even launched it in 2009 mirrors theirs
Oh, and if they act like Mr Ver and try and run away....
you know, jurisdiction issues et cetera and associated reasoning
CSW
Jan 29, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1611169327384500?thread_ts=1611169327.384500&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/1969
- The Final Countdown. Europe (Official Video)
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+final+countdown&docid=607994261061043386&mid=E8A0E403467AE64DCAD4E8A0E403467AE64DCAD4&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
so far Coobieee and crew
https://t.me/joinchat/VNOTBvWDr9d8ZCTc
Did you know that the bitcoin White Paper is included in the bitcoin database.
So, BTC and BCH are publishing a copy of the White Paper
you see, I didn't publish the White Paper I distributed it
So, unauthorised use and distribution is a breach of the copyright
yes, you could create a new Genesis block but then you would still require the old Blockchain to be able to validate all of the UTXO's
and that would still require licensing
so, I guess that's frypan or fire
rock and hard place
Unfortunately, this means they not only have to prove that I'm not Satoshi (i.e. try prove the truth is a lie) but also demonstrate that my version of bitcoin as I originally envisioned it before I even launched it in 2009 mirrors theirs
Oh, and if they act like Mr Ver and try and run away....
you know, jurisdiction issues et cetera and associated reasoning
CSW
Jan 29, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1611169327384500?thread_ts=1611169327.384500&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/1969
Bing
the final countdown - Bing
Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.
Follow up with Quotes
Dr. Craig Wright awarded USA Copyright for Bitcoin White Paper
The USA Copyright office has awarded Dr. Craig Steven Wright the copyright for the original Bitcoin whitepaper, which Dr. Wright originally published online in 2008 under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto.
The copyright was awarded after the Copyright office was presented with the concrete proof that Dr. Wright was indeed the author of the seminal paper which started the Bitcoin revolution.
In addition to the original Bitcoin whitepaper, the USA Copyright office awarded Dr. Wright the copyright for most of the original Bitcoin code (version 0.1).
The copyrights can be found here.
U.S. copyright registration no. TXu 2-136-996, effective date April 11, 2019, for the paper entitled Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, with year of completion 2008. The registration recognizes the author as Craig Steven Wright, using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto.
U.S. copyright registration no. TX-8-708-058, effective date April 13, 2019, for computer program entitled Bitcoin, with year of completion 2009 and date of first publication January 3, 2009. The registration recognizes the author as Craig Steven Wright, using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. Wright wrote most of version 0.1 of the Bitcoin client software, and the registration covers the portions he authored.
Wright originally come out as the creator of Bitcoin in 2016, and provided proof to several people, including Gavin Anderson former lead developer of the Bitcoin project. However, the Bitcoin Core (BTC) group, who had commandeered the Bitcoin project, led a successful smear campaign against Dr. Wright.
The group had twisted the original vision of Bitcoin by stifling scaling attempts and creating secondary settlement networks, like the Lighting Network, which take transactions off chain and away from what Bitcoin was meant to be.
It was this bastardization, twisting and crippling of Bitcoin that turned it into what BTC is today. This pushed Wright to lift the Satoshi Nakamoto veil for good.
Dr. Wright explains, “When I wrote the bitcoin Whitepaper, I uploaded it on the bitcoin.org domain so that people would start understanding bitcoin. I've come to understand that few people if any of taken the time to understand what is written in this paper so I have formally published it and registered it with the copyright registry so that I can start teaching people the true meaning of what bitcoin is about and stop people twisting the narrative.”
That twisted narrative lead to criminals, like drug dealers and money launders, to become the face of Bitcoin. The accountability and traceability that the Bitcoin blockchain provides was left on the back burner, and it was marketed to the worst elements of society. Wright could not stand for that.
“The last thing that I said to Gavin Anderson in 2011 when I handed him the control of the code was that "I wish you wouldn't keep talking about me as a mysterious shadowy figure, the press just turns that into a pirate currency angle,” Dr. Wright recalls. “Maybe instead make it about the open source project and give more credit to your dev contributors; it helps motivate them.”
Now that Wright has reclaimed ownership of the Bitcoin whitepaper, he’s hoping his creation can regain the original mission it was meant to have. “Bitcoin was designed to be honest and not another criminal coin,” he said. “It's time for people to learn that and see that I'm (as Satoshi) not just some shady figure because I didn't want publicity”
Dr. Wright will be attending the upcoming CoinGeek Toronto scaling conference, and will feature prominently in a Fireside chat with Bitcoin Association Founding President Jimmy Nguyen. The conversation is bound to have plenty of revelations about the early history of Bitcoin, so it will be well worth attending.
https://coingeek.com/bitcoin-creator-craig-s-wright-satoshi-nakamoto-granted-us-copyright-registratio
CSW
May 21, 2019
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2220
Dr. Craig Wright awarded USA Copyright for Bitcoin White Paper
The USA Copyright office has awarded Dr. Craig Steven Wright the copyright for the original Bitcoin whitepaper, which Dr. Wright originally published online in 2008 under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto.
The copyright was awarded after the Copyright office was presented with the concrete proof that Dr. Wright was indeed the author of the seminal paper which started the Bitcoin revolution.
In addition to the original Bitcoin whitepaper, the USA Copyright office awarded Dr. Wright the copyright for most of the original Bitcoin code (version 0.1).
The copyrights can be found here.
U.S. copyright registration no. TXu 2-136-996, effective date April 11, 2019, for the paper entitled Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, with year of completion 2008. The registration recognizes the author as Craig Steven Wright, using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto.
U.S. copyright registration no. TX-8-708-058, effective date April 13, 2019, for computer program entitled Bitcoin, with year of completion 2009 and date of first publication January 3, 2009. The registration recognizes the author as Craig Steven Wright, using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. Wright wrote most of version 0.1 of the Bitcoin client software, and the registration covers the portions he authored.
Wright originally come out as the creator of Bitcoin in 2016, and provided proof to several people, including Gavin Anderson former lead developer of the Bitcoin project. However, the Bitcoin Core (BTC) group, who had commandeered the Bitcoin project, led a successful smear campaign against Dr. Wright.
The group had twisted the original vision of Bitcoin by stifling scaling attempts and creating secondary settlement networks, like the Lighting Network, which take transactions off chain and away from what Bitcoin was meant to be.
It was this bastardization, twisting and crippling of Bitcoin that turned it into what BTC is today. This pushed Wright to lift the Satoshi Nakamoto veil for good.
Dr. Wright explains, “When I wrote the bitcoin Whitepaper, I uploaded it on the bitcoin.org domain so that people would start understanding bitcoin. I've come to understand that few people if any of taken the time to understand what is written in this paper so I have formally published it and registered it with the copyright registry so that I can start teaching people the true meaning of what bitcoin is about and stop people twisting the narrative.”
That twisted narrative lead to criminals, like drug dealers and money launders, to become the face of Bitcoin. The accountability and traceability that the Bitcoin blockchain provides was left on the back burner, and it was marketed to the worst elements of society. Wright could not stand for that.
“The last thing that I said to Gavin Anderson in 2011 when I handed him the control of the code was that "I wish you wouldn't keep talking about me as a mysterious shadowy figure, the press just turns that into a pirate currency angle,” Dr. Wright recalls. “Maybe instead make it about the open source project and give more credit to your dev contributors; it helps motivate them.”
Now that Wright has reclaimed ownership of the Bitcoin whitepaper, he’s hoping his creation can regain the original mission it was meant to have. “Bitcoin was designed to be honest and not another criminal coin,” he said. “It's time for people to learn that and see that I'm (as Satoshi) not just some shady figure because I didn't want publicity”
Dr. Wright will be attending the upcoming CoinGeek Toronto scaling conference, and will feature prominently in a Fireside chat with Bitcoin Association Founding President Jimmy Nguyen. The conversation is bound to have plenty of revelations about the early history of Bitcoin, so it will be well worth attending.
https://coingeek.com/bitcoin-creator-craig-s-wright-satoshi-nakamoto-granted-us-copyright-registratio
CSW
May 21, 2019
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2220
CoinGeek
Bitcoin creator Craig S. Wright (Satoshi Nakamoto) granted US copyright registrations for Bitcoin white paper and code - CoinGeek
Craig S. Wright has been granted U.S. copyright registrations for the famed original Bitcoin white paper, and most of the original Bitcoin code (version 0.1).
I found this today and I couldn't believe it
"7. Satoshi Removed His Name from the Bitcoin Software Before Leaving.
Finally, a last interesting find was that Satoshi did formally “quit” Bitcoin, removing his name from the copyright claim in the software and leaving the code to all “Bitcoin developers.” "
10 Years Ago Today, Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Sent His Final Message.
Pete Rizzo
Apr 26, 2021,12:30pm EDT
|1,026,250 views
https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/peterizzo/2021/04/26/10-years-ago-today-bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-sent-his-final-message/amp/
"7. Satoshi Removed His Name from the Bitcoin Software Before Leaving.
Finally, a last interesting find was that Satoshi did formally “quit” Bitcoin, removing his name from the copyright claim in the software and leaving the code to all “Bitcoin developers.” "
10 Years Ago Today, Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Sent His Final Message.
Pete Rizzo
Apr 26, 2021,12:30pm EDT
|1,026,250 views
https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/peterizzo/2021/04/26/10-years-ago-today-bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-sent-his-final-message/amp/
Forbes
10 Years Ago Today, Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Sent His Final Message
On April 26, 2011, Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto sent his final emails to fellow developers. New research explore the full story further.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/882164196e5b1971313493f95a6d027f05e2ec92#diff-7116ef0705885343c9e1b2171a06be0e
https://archive.is/Elzqp#diff-400d38e5cfee181230373a8b02d38f50271a5bf62c62410382efddb8e8b19e22
https://archive.is/Elzqp#diff-400d38e5cfee181230373a8b02d38f50271a5bf62c62410382efddb8e8b19e22
GitHub
Update all copyrights to 2012 · bitcoin/bitcoin@8821641
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree. Contribute to bitcoin/bitcoin development by creating an account on GitHub.
1/2
What you going to soon find out is that most of what the other side have if not all is a combination of hearsay and character attacks. It is been difficult not responding on much of this for a period of over two years. But for instance, they talk about made up companies in the trust and said that they didn't exist because this is all they have.
This is the part that nobody wants you to look at.
Craig Wright R&D was the original name of the trust. Even though the trust was overseas, I registered these in Australia. As trustee I acted for it is an overseas entity. When they say how this didn't exist, or that the trust didn't exist, that is one little problem. The problem is that I registered it for an Australian business number.
Craig Wright R&D and the other entities as businesses representing the trusts have been registered since 29 February 2000. It was reformed under the trust business name for myself, remembering that a business called Craig Wright is not Craig Wright the person, on 10 February 2007. This is when I started creating bitcoin.
At that point I changed from DeMorgan to using myself as the trustee name. There are multiple other overseas trusts that were registered in Australia.
These all have records. These are not as difficult to check as people think either.
In January 2009 I formed a company called information defence in Australia.
In May 2009 I formed a company called integyrs in Australia.
In June 2009 with other people I formed a company called Greyfog in Australia. Others such as Cloudcroft all followed before Panopticrypt was formed in 2011.
All of these entities were held in trust. That is my shares were held in trust.
What people don't seem to understand is that the legal owner of an asset is the trustee and the trust maintains equitable ownership.
Tulip is simply the renamed version of the trust called Craig Wright R&D and DeMorgan at various times in history.
The overseas companies owned the Australian companies.
The Australian companies did the creation of intellectual property and any activity such as bitcoin mining. Many of the activities that I did I published widely and hence the intellectual property in those has been given freely to the world.
More importantly, every single bitcoin was created on the launch of bitcoin in January 2009. At that point I was controlling a company in Australia that owned all of the just under 21 million bitcoin denominated tokens that would ever exist.
Bitcoin was created using what is known in legal circles as a unilateral contract, this is a concept that even a junior law student would understand. See carbolic Smoke Ball.
In 2009, there was no millions in bitcoin as some people seem to think. There was around $2 million worth of running computers that was cost coupled with further sunk costs. The value of the bitcoin was nothing. It was not the value of computer hardware, it was only the value that people would be willing to pay for it and that was zero right up until 2010.
The interesting thing that people don't understand in an analysis of partnership, if there was one with Dave, he would owe me money. There isn't of course but the reality is partners have to share cost and profit.
The distribution was created on the launch of bitcoin. It's not the distributor, that is a process. The contract is the issue, I am simply put the issuer.
The distinction here is that bitcoin is issued initially without value and hence in the manner it was issued there isn't all the problems people speculate about. By creating bitcoin and launching it the way I did, all of the increase in value was created after the launch. More importantly, it took a lot of money, time and machines to be able to enable all of this.
CSW
May 26, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1590505437082800?thread_ts=1590505437.082800&cid=C5131HKFX
1/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2365
What you going to soon find out is that most of what the other side have if not all is a combination of hearsay and character attacks. It is been difficult not responding on much of this for a period of over two years. But for instance, they talk about made up companies in the trust and said that they didn't exist because this is all they have.
This is the part that nobody wants you to look at.
Craig Wright R&D was the original name of the trust. Even though the trust was overseas, I registered these in Australia. As trustee I acted for it is an overseas entity. When they say how this didn't exist, or that the trust didn't exist, that is one little problem. The problem is that I registered it for an Australian business number.
Craig Wright R&D and the other entities as businesses representing the trusts have been registered since 29 February 2000. It was reformed under the trust business name for myself, remembering that a business called Craig Wright is not Craig Wright the person, on 10 February 2007. This is when I started creating bitcoin.
At that point I changed from DeMorgan to using myself as the trustee name. There are multiple other overseas trusts that were registered in Australia.
These all have records. These are not as difficult to check as people think either.
In January 2009 I formed a company called information defence in Australia.
In May 2009 I formed a company called integyrs in Australia.
In June 2009 with other people I formed a company called Greyfog in Australia. Others such as Cloudcroft all followed before Panopticrypt was formed in 2011.
All of these entities were held in trust. That is my shares were held in trust.
What people don't seem to understand is that the legal owner of an asset is the trustee and the trust maintains equitable ownership.
Tulip is simply the renamed version of the trust called Craig Wright R&D and DeMorgan at various times in history.
The overseas companies owned the Australian companies.
The Australian companies did the creation of intellectual property and any activity such as bitcoin mining. Many of the activities that I did I published widely and hence the intellectual property in those has been given freely to the world.
More importantly, every single bitcoin was created on the launch of bitcoin in January 2009. At that point I was controlling a company in Australia that owned all of the just under 21 million bitcoin denominated tokens that would ever exist.
Bitcoin was created using what is known in legal circles as a unilateral contract, this is a concept that even a junior law student would understand. See carbolic Smoke Ball.
In 2009, there was no millions in bitcoin as some people seem to think. There was around $2 million worth of running computers that was cost coupled with further sunk costs. The value of the bitcoin was nothing. It was not the value of computer hardware, it was only the value that people would be willing to pay for it and that was zero right up until 2010.
The interesting thing that people don't understand in an analysis of partnership, if there was one with Dave, he would owe me money. There isn't of course but the reality is partners have to share cost and profit.
The distribution was created on the launch of bitcoin. It's not the distributor, that is a process. The contract is the issue, I am simply put the issuer.
The distinction here is that bitcoin is issued initially without value and hence in the manner it was issued there isn't all the problems people speculate about. By creating bitcoin and launching it the way I did, all of the increase in value was created after the launch. More importantly, it took a lot of money, time and machines to be able to enable all of this.
CSW
May 26, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1590505437082800?thread_ts=1590505437.082800&cid=C5131HKFX
1/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2365
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
May 26, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1590505437082800?thread_ts=1590505437.082800&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2365
May 26, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1590505437082800?thread_ts=1590505437.082800&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2365
The license of the database is not applied under MIT.
under an MIT license each file needs to individually have the license applied. The database was not created with a license and it was put up for download without license.
The agents of the network other nodes.
Nodes are paid to provide a contract service. They are not instantly paid, there is a maturity level of 100 blocks that means that they cannot quickly act and take a block that is orphaned
Blocks do not act to issue or create bitcoin.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090131115053/https://bitcoin.org/
The original site states this very clearly.
Coins are distributed to the nodes.. They are not created by the nodes
Nodes "generate blocks".
They do not create bitcoin
nodes are agents of the network and are paid
Nodes create entries in the database as an outsourced agency. They are an agent.
Without an explicit agreement stating that they maintain intellectual property rights, agents don't gain rights.
The creation of blocks is a distributed process because of the hundred block maturity level.
Nodes do not merely find a block solution, they have to propagate it to other nodes and have it valid for 100 blocks. The validation process involves other nodes ensuring that its correct
Note, the way that you validate a block is by creating another block on top of it, so only miners are nodes
The ordering of transactions is contained as a database right. That will include the Merkle tree and hash structure
the block headers will be included as a database right
Think about the contents of the database table.
You can own a database or public emails - the structure matters
And, in Bitcoin, it cannot have the structure changed
https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/database-rights-the-basics
The creator of a database can allow use any way he wants.
Bitcoin requires that people can append and view the database. It does not allow them to take it and use it in other means outside of the use in bitcoin.
The nodes provide a service in creating the database. The database can be protected if there is a substantial investment. So far around 20 million bitcoin (and BTC on the copy) have been put into the payment of obtaining and verifying and presenting this information.
I think given the current value of the complete system that this is a substantial investment.
An infringement occurs when an individual or company extracts already utilises all or a substantial part of the contents of a protected database. This has to be done without the consent of the owner.
The rights to the bitcoin database a limited for the verification, exchange and validation of bitcoin transactions. When used for bitcoin, the databases validly deployed. That is bitcoin the electronic cash system.
The mere consultation of a database, using the database to send transactions or to act as a node is not an infringement under the provisions.
77m Limited v Ordnance Survey Limited [2019]
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5dcb8f992c94e07f88e8ddb2
The TX to Finney was not until days later and after Bk 70
No, Each block contains at least 1 TX
A database is not covered under MIT licenses unless it is explicitly and independently licensed.
The database rights provisions of Europe do not cover software. These are two separate issues.
When individuals started using the original version of code, they downloaded the first version of the database from my nodes.
CSW
Jan 4,. 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609783515120700?thread_ts=1609775039.107700&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2430
under an MIT license each file needs to individually have the license applied. The database was not created with a license and it was put up for download without license.
The agents of the network other nodes.
Nodes are paid to provide a contract service. They are not instantly paid, there is a maturity level of 100 blocks that means that they cannot quickly act and take a block that is orphaned
Blocks do not act to issue or create bitcoin.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090131115053/https://bitcoin.org/
The original site states this very clearly.
Coins are distributed to the nodes.. They are not created by the nodes
Nodes "generate blocks".
They do not create bitcoin
nodes are agents of the network and are paid
Nodes create entries in the database as an outsourced agency. They are an agent.
Without an explicit agreement stating that they maintain intellectual property rights, agents don't gain rights.
The creation of blocks is a distributed process because of the hundred block maturity level.
Nodes do not merely find a block solution, they have to propagate it to other nodes and have it valid for 100 blocks. The validation process involves other nodes ensuring that its correct
Note, the way that you validate a block is by creating another block on top of it, so only miners are nodes
The ordering of transactions is contained as a database right. That will include the Merkle tree and hash structure
the block headers will be included as a database right
Think about the contents of the database table.
You can own a database or public emails - the structure matters
And, in Bitcoin, it cannot have the structure changed
https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/database-rights-the-basics
The creator of a database can allow use any way he wants.
Bitcoin requires that people can append and view the database. It does not allow them to take it and use it in other means outside of the use in bitcoin.
The nodes provide a service in creating the database. The database can be protected if there is a substantial investment. So far around 20 million bitcoin (and BTC on the copy) have been put into the payment of obtaining and verifying and presenting this information.
I think given the current value of the complete system that this is a substantial investment.
An infringement occurs when an individual or company extracts already utilises all or a substantial part of the contents of a protected database. This has to be done without the consent of the owner.
The rights to the bitcoin database a limited for the verification, exchange and validation of bitcoin transactions. When used for bitcoin, the databases validly deployed. That is bitcoin the electronic cash system.
The mere consultation of a database, using the database to send transactions or to act as a node is not an infringement under the provisions.
77m Limited v Ordnance Survey Limited [2019]
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5dcb8f992c94e07f88e8ddb2
The TX to Finney was not until days later and after Bk 70
No, Each block contains at least 1 TX
A database is not covered under MIT licenses unless it is explicitly and independently licensed.
The database rights provisions of Europe do not cover software. These are two separate issues.
When individuals started using the original version of code, they downloaded the first version of the database from my nodes.
CSW
Jan 4,. 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609783515120700?thread_ts=1609775039.107700&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2430
Pinsent Masons
Database rights: the basics
Databases can be a valuable commercial asset and generally time and money is invested in their creation and maintenance.
If I copy Facebook and Twitter's databases and run up a competing system, the are not FB and Twitter
Change the protocol
Copy the Databases
And you are not bitcoin
BTC is nothing like bitcoin
It is merely a copy of the database that is used to start a copy by breaches of copyright
A theft
CSW
Jun 10, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1623330469323100?thread_ts=1623330469.323100&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2564
Change the protocol
Copy the Databases
And you are not bitcoin
BTC is nothing like bitcoin
It is merely a copy of the database that is used to start a copy by breaches of copyright
A theft
CSW
Jun 10, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1623330469323100?thread_ts=1623330469.323100&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2564
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Jun 10, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1623330469323100?thread_ts=1623330469.323100&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2564
Jun 10, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1623330469323100?thread_ts=1623330469.323100&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2564
Will attempts to enforce Bitcoin DB rights in the EU be effective?
Have seen discussions arguing no because Directive 96/9/EC restricts protections to 15 years. If true, this would provide just over 4 years of protection remaining.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0009:EN:HTML
Have seen discussions arguing no because Directive 96/9/EC restricts protections to 15 years. If true, this would provide just over 4 years of protection remaining.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0009:EN:HTML
Bitcoin como un Security
Por Craig Wright
25 julio 2021
https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/bitcoin-como-sistema-de-seguridad-por-craig-wright/
Bitcoin as a Security
By Craig Wright
25 Jul 2021
https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/bitcoin-as-a-security/
Por Craig Wright
25 julio 2021
https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/bitcoin-como-sistema-de-seguridad-por-craig-wright/
Bitcoin as a Security
By Craig Wright
25 Jul 2021
https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/bitcoin-as-a-security/
Ramon Quesada
Bitcoin como un "Security". Por Craig Wright | Ramon Quesada
Bitcoin como un “Security” (Depósito de valor) Por Craig Wright 25 julio 2021 https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/bitcoin-as-a-security/ En la publicación de hoy, me esforzaré por explicar algunos de los razonamientos detrás de cómo creé…
And, in a way, there always was a kill switch in Bitcoin. But is is not the technicall one people think.
Bitcoin does not survive a nuclear war.
Bitcoin does not exist without a highly interconnected society. The mythology around bitcoin is quite frankly complete bullshit. There is literally no way that you will have bitcoin surviving in an anarco capitalist world without government.
The reality here is that bitcoin is not about decentralisation and never was. The only decentralisation happens in terms of cash and SPV. The use of mining precludes a large number of individuals that people such as those in 2008 sought to bring about. They didn’t want to listen to me back then, and they talked about how they could improve my system, but the reality is, it was designed very carefully to ensure that that never happens.
We kill switch in bitcoin is not technical and also very simple. In 2009, the Australian government could have shot down bitcoin if they managed to bankrupt me as they tried and failed to do successfully.
The database is not covered by copyright under MIT. Further, database rights restrict what people can do. There are no encryption protocols within bitcoin. Bitcoin is purely clear text. It is not cryptographic but rather uses a digital signature algorithm to simplify the verification. There is no other way to verify billions of people without identity. But, that does not preclude other methodologies for enforcement, and the reality here is that these act outside of the necessary forms of control that users need. There are very few courts in the world compared to the number of people. There are very few governments in the world compared to the number of people. Governments and courts are never pseudonymous, let alone anonymous.
If I had not taken the actions I took in 2011...
Bitcoin would already be shut down
If that had occurred, it would never occur again.
The concept of digital currency was already rejected when I made bitcoin and if bitcoin failed, every future attempt would likely fail
Bitcoin enforces property rights
The construction of the Corporations overseas and the trusts Was carefully planned starting even before the development of bitcoin is a commercial project in order to isolate ownership from me
Because of the weakness in bitcoin is my ownership at the start that was transferred in 2009
If the Australian office succeeded in their attempt too bankrupt me...
The Austrian government would have owned and closed bitcoin
There would be no Domains running exchanges
there would be no Internet connections and IP addresses associated with applications
bitcoin does not run outside of connectivity requirements and naming
bitcoin does not run over anonymouus systems such as Tor
CSW
Oct 26, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635199476387200?thread_ts=1635199476.387200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3199
Bitcoin does not survive a nuclear war.
Bitcoin does not exist without a highly interconnected society. The mythology around bitcoin is quite frankly complete bullshit. There is literally no way that you will have bitcoin surviving in an anarco capitalist world without government.
The reality here is that bitcoin is not about decentralisation and never was. The only decentralisation happens in terms of cash and SPV. The use of mining precludes a large number of individuals that people such as those in 2008 sought to bring about. They didn’t want to listen to me back then, and they talked about how they could improve my system, but the reality is, it was designed very carefully to ensure that that never happens.
We kill switch in bitcoin is not technical and also very simple. In 2009, the Australian government could have shot down bitcoin if they managed to bankrupt me as they tried and failed to do successfully.
The database is not covered by copyright under MIT. Further, database rights restrict what people can do. There are no encryption protocols within bitcoin. Bitcoin is purely clear text. It is not cryptographic but rather uses a digital signature algorithm to simplify the verification. There is no other way to verify billions of people without identity. But, that does not preclude other methodologies for enforcement, and the reality here is that these act outside of the necessary forms of control that users need. There are very few courts in the world compared to the number of people. There are very few governments in the world compared to the number of people. Governments and courts are never pseudonymous, let alone anonymous.
If I had not taken the actions I took in 2011...
Bitcoin would already be shut down
If that had occurred, it would never occur again.
The concept of digital currency was already rejected when I made bitcoin and if bitcoin failed, every future attempt would likely fail
Bitcoin enforces property rights
The construction of the Corporations overseas and the trusts Was carefully planned starting even before the development of bitcoin is a commercial project in order to isolate ownership from me
Because of the weakness in bitcoin is my ownership at the start that was transferred in 2009
If the Australian office succeeded in their attempt too bankrupt me...
The Austrian government would have owned and closed bitcoin
There would be no Domains running exchanges
there would be no Internet connections and IP addresses associated with applications
bitcoin does not run outside of connectivity requirements and naming
bitcoin does not run over anonymouus systems such as Tor
CSW
Oct 26, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635199476387200?thread_ts=1635199476.387200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3199
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Oct 26, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635199476387200?thread_ts=1635199476.387200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3199
Oct 26, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635199476387200?thread_ts=1635199476.387200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3199
What none of you truly seem to understand and that I’m going to try to clarify something from Frank Herbert’s novel. He who can destroy a thing controls a thing.
In 2011, I constructed a series of corporate movements that removed assets from my name. This is not part of the Ira Kleiman case; rather, it was done because of the action being taken illegally by the Australian Tax Office against me.
Some people, including I guess, this the other side, don’t want this case. I am resigned to it. I have been for quite some time now. I have zero issues with the case, and right now, you would have to offer me something to even have may consider settling. Not, note to settle, to even consider to settle. You have to pay me to come to the table.
My answer to the case is very simple - bring it on. The best that anyone would do is bring out the truth and that’s what I want.
When I left the further development of bitcoin, including the task of scaling and getting the opcodes back and working functionally so that people didn’t complain about security issues, I did so having removed all property assets that anyone can take all simultaneously, allowing myself a means to control the database.
If Core had simply continued on the plan that I had set and left my protocol unchanged, likely, you would never have heard about me again or even in the first place. I had never planned on coming out as Satoshi and taking control of my invention. You see, with a set protocol, there is no need. TCP doesn’t have anyone in charge.
The only way that bitcoin is decentralised, as people say, is to have the protocol fixed. However, this still does not stop what others are calling legal attacks. Because there is no legal attack and a rule of law country. The only people who are attacked under legal provisions are criminals. I didn’t build bitcoin for them. I built an honest system.
The thing that I decided in 2016 would eventually happen depending on the path taken. If Core had not stolen my database and created an airdrop that I would not have cared. I did want to scale, but it is the theft of my intellectual property that gauls me most.
The mantra of your key, your bitcoin, was never mine. It was never something that started with bitcoin, and it will never be something that is in any system that I have created.
People do not seem to understand that every issuer and every Blockchain maintains some control because of database rights. The new copy that database, you copy obligations, and you breach the owner’s rights if you do not negotiate a settlement with that person. You do not have the right to take the database, and you don’t get to say, “it’s open-source; it is mine”. Bitcoin is not one of the Communist versions of open source. It doesn’t give you rights because of the MIT license.
I will not destroy value - even in a crap system unless they refuse to follow the rules
CSW
Oct 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635332434444400?thread_ts=1635332434.444400&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3208
In 2011, I constructed a series of corporate movements that removed assets from my name. This is not part of the Ira Kleiman case; rather, it was done because of the action being taken illegally by the Australian Tax Office against me.
Some people, including I guess, this the other side, don’t want this case. I am resigned to it. I have been for quite some time now. I have zero issues with the case, and right now, you would have to offer me something to even have may consider settling. Not, note to settle, to even consider to settle. You have to pay me to come to the table.
My answer to the case is very simple - bring it on. The best that anyone would do is bring out the truth and that’s what I want.
When I left the further development of bitcoin, including the task of scaling and getting the opcodes back and working functionally so that people didn’t complain about security issues, I did so having removed all property assets that anyone can take all simultaneously, allowing myself a means to control the database.
If Core had simply continued on the plan that I had set and left my protocol unchanged, likely, you would never have heard about me again or even in the first place. I had never planned on coming out as Satoshi and taking control of my invention. You see, with a set protocol, there is no need. TCP doesn’t have anyone in charge.
The only way that bitcoin is decentralised, as people say, is to have the protocol fixed. However, this still does not stop what others are calling legal attacks. Because there is no legal attack and a rule of law country. The only people who are attacked under legal provisions are criminals. I didn’t build bitcoin for them. I built an honest system.
The thing that I decided in 2016 would eventually happen depending on the path taken. If Core had not stolen my database and created an airdrop that I would not have cared. I did want to scale, but it is the theft of my intellectual property that gauls me most.
The mantra of your key, your bitcoin, was never mine. It was never something that started with bitcoin, and it will never be something that is in any system that I have created.
People do not seem to understand that every issuer and every Blockchain maintains some control because of database rights. The new copy that database, you copy obligations, and you breach the owner’s rights if you do not negotiate a settlement with that person. You do not have the right to take the database, and you don’t get to say, “it’s open-source; it is mine”. Bitcoin is not one of the Communist versions of open source. It doesn’t give you rights because of the MIT license.
I will not destroy value - even in a crap system unless they refuse to follow the rules
CSW
Oct 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635332434444400?thread_ts=1635332434.444400&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3208
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Oct 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635332434444400?thread_ts=1635332434.444400&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3208
Oct 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1635332434444400?thread_ts=1635332434.444400&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3208