Tag: claims

  • UK High Court Judge rules against Craig Wright over Bitcoin copyright claims

    UK High Court Judge rules against Craig Wright over Bitcoin copyright claims

    UK High Court rules against Craig Wright over Bitcoin (BTC) copyright claims

    The UK High Court has delivered a damning verdict against Craig Wright, a controversial figure claiming to be the elusive creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto.

    Judge James Mellor, in a written judgment, asserted that Wright had lied “extensively and repeatedly” throughout the trial, further accusing him of presenting “fabricated” evidence to support his claims.

    COPA wins against Craig Wright

    Judge Mellor’s ruling serves as a culmination of a protracted legal battle that has spanned several years.

    The lawsuit, brought forth by the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), aimed to challenge Craig Wright’s assertions of ownership over the intellectual rights to Bitcoin’s code and whitepaper.

    Wright’s purported attempts to lay claim to these foundational aspects of the cryptocurrency ecosystem have been met with scepticism and legal resistance from various quarters.

    Wright’s litigious nature, characterized by numerous lawsuits against developers and individuals critical of his claims, has raised concerns within the Bitcoin community.

    However, Mellor acknowledged the adverse impact of Wright’s aggressive legal strategy on Bitcoin developers, stating that Satoshi Nakamoto, known for a collaborative and non-confrontational approach, would unlikely resort to litigation.

    Fabrications and forgeries of documents

    The judgment highlighted Wright’s alleged fabrications and forgeries of documents on a significant scale, all in support of his central claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

    The judge characterized Wright’s actions as “clumsy” and underscored the pivotal role these falsehoods played in shaping the trial’s outcome.

    COPA, formed with the primary objective of defending the open nature of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, contested Wright’s assertions, arguing that such claims could stifle innovation and deter developers from contributing to the Bitcoin network.

    Throughout the trial, evidence emerged casting doubt on the authenticity of Wright’s claims.

    Documents submitted by Wright’s defence purportedly supporting his identity as Satoshi Nakamoto were scrutinized, revealing inconsistencies and anomalies.

    Fonts that did not exist at the alleged time of their creation and metadata indicating recent document alterations were among the discrepancies cited in Judge Mellor’s judgment.

    Perjury charges loom over Craig Wright

    The legal saga surrounding Craig Wright has been closely monitored by the cryptocurrency community, given its potential ramifications for the future of Bitcoin and the broader blockchain space.

    While Craig Wright has announced on X that he will be appealing the ruling, the ruling represents a significant setback for his ambitions, with the possibility of perjury charges looming over him.

    In response to the verdict, COPA hailed the decision as a victory for open innovation and the principles upon which Bitcoin was founded.

    The alliance reiterated its commitment to safeguarding the decentralized nature of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, vowing to continue its efforts to protect against unwarranted copyright claims.

    As the dust settles on this legal showdown, the broader implications of Judge Mellor’s ruling reverberate across the cryptocurrency landscape.

    The verdict not only underscores the importance of transparency and integrity within the community but also serves as a cautionary tale against attempts to monopolize or control foundational elements of decentralized technologies like Bitcoin.



    Source link

  • Blast founder denies Ponzi scheme claims as TVL rockets past $400 million

    Blast founder denies Ponzi scheme claims as TVL rockets past $400 million

    • Blast was supported by a $20Ms investment from notable backers like Paradigm and Standard Crypto at launch.
    • Blast is facing Ponzi scheme claims.
    • Roquerre clarifies that Blast’s 4 to 5% yield comes from reputable platforms like Lido and MakerDAO.

    In a recent twist of events, Blast has faced scrutiny and Ponzi scheme claims. However, the founder, Tieshun Roquerre, has vehemently denied these allegations.

    Despite ongoing debates, the recently launched Blast platform has achieved a significant milestone with a Total Value Locked (TVL) exceeding $400 million, emphasizing the platform’s rapid growth and unique features, including ‘Blast Points’ for community engagement and an innovative approach to Layer 2 (L2) native yield generation.

    As the platform gains attention with a Total Value Locked (TVL) surpassing $400 million, Roquerre has sought to clarify misconceptions surrounding Blast’s innovative approach to yield generation and community engagement.

    What is Blast?

    Launched in an invite-only early access mode, the Blast platform has quickly garnered attention, raising $20 million from investors including Paradigm and Standard Crypto.

    With a TVL exceeding $400 million, the platform’s unique features, such as ‘Blast Points’ for community engagement, have contributed to its rapid growth. The TVL milestone reflects confidence from investors and users alike, despite ongoing debates about the platform’s viability and security.

    Blast positions itself as the first Layer 2 (L2) with native yield. Promising an EVM-compatible optimistic rollup, the platform allows users to earn yield on stablecoins. By bridging assets like USDC, USDT, and DAI to Blast, users participate in on-chain T-Bill protocols like MakerDAO, receiving yields in Blast’s auto-rebasing stablecoin, USDB.

    Despite concerns about a lockup period and the L2’s yet-to-be-launched status, Roquerre envisions Blast’s potential impact on reducing transaction costs and enhancing institutional-grade NFT perps.

    Addressing Blast’s Ponzi scheme claims

    Tieshun Roquerre, the founder of Blast, has responded to allegations labelling the platform as a Ponzi scheme.

    Roquerre strongly refutes these claims, emphasizing that Blast’s 4 to 5% yield is sourced from reputable platforms like Lido and MakerDAO. He points out that these yields are a result of Ethereum’s staking rewards and on-chain T-Bills, positioning them as sustainable components within the crypto economy. Roquerre’s commitment to transparency aims to dispel misconceptions surrounding Blast’s financial model.

    As Blast navigates its early stages, the cryptocurrency community remains vigilant, observing the platform’s progress and assessing its potential impact on the evolving landscape of crypto finance.

    Source link

  • Bitcoin still trading like a risk asset, despite claims of decoupling amid banking crisis

    Bitcoin still trading like a risk asset, despite claims of decoupling amid banking crisis

    Key Takeaways

    • First Republic has become the latest bank to collapse in the US
    • Bitcoin has bounced this week, as it did in March when SVB fell and the banking crisis was triggered
    • Our Head of Research, Dan Ashmore, contends that Bitcoin remains a risk asset, despite claims from enthusiasts that a decoupling is occuring
    • Correlation with stock market is still high, he writes, pointing to altered expectations around interest rate policy as the reason Bitcoin has moved upward

    There has been chatter amid the market recently (again) that Bitcoin is decoupling from stocks. Something about Bitcoin offering an alternate store of value outside the realm of the fiat world, a proposition that has suddenly become a lot more valuable as the banking turmoil striking the US rages. 

    Let me start by saying that I don’t think my opinion is very valid here. I can’t predict the future. But I want to look at the numbers because I believe they prove that this theory, that Bitcoin has decoupled, is objectively false. 

    I wrote a deep dive on Bitcoin’s correlation with stocks in March, when this theory originally surfaced as Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, while Bitcoin raced upwards. The same logic applies now, so let me try summarise it by refreshing the same numbers. 

    And a quick note – this article is nothing about my beliefs around Bitcoin’s trajectory in the long-term. Whether Bitcoin decouples in future and establishes itself as a store of value akin to gold, uncorrelated to other risk assets, is a debate for another time and not one I will delve into here. I’m purely looking at the price action today and saying that, as of May 2023, Bitcoin is trading like an extreme-risk asset, completely removed from this uncorrelated vision. 

    Bitcoin’s correlation with the Nasdaq

    The natural place to look is tech stocks, being one of the riskier subsectors of the equity universe. The Nasdaq, being a tech-heavy index, is often seen as the benchmark for this sector. So let us chart Bitcoin’s correlation with the Nasdaq over the past couple of years. 

    Using a 60-Day Pearson measure, the chart shows that the correlation has bounced around a lot over the past couple of years. For the most part, however, it has shown a relatively strong relationship, frequently residing above 0.5. 

    There were a couple of dips. The first is clearly May/June 2021, when Bitcoin cratered from $63,000 to $31,000 for no apparent reason, before climbing back up into the high sixties later that year. 

    The second large dip in correlation is in November 2022. This was none other than the FTX collapse, the staggering implosion sending shockwaves through the crypto industry. At the same time, stocks actually advanced significantly as softer inflation data cropped up and optimism increased around the future path of interest rates. Cue the big dip in correlation. 

    Therefore, there have been two periods of notable, and very large, decorrelations. Both of these occurred as crypto melted down, independently of the stock market. If you look closely over the last year – I have shown the correlation over the last year below – you will see another big deviation in the summer of 2022 when crypto “bank” Celsius shut withdrawals. 

    And most importantly, the correlation has come back up swiftly every time. Including in March, when Bitcoin outperformed in the aftermath of the banking crisis. 

    But, did it really outperform in March? The correlation above remained relatively high, certainly nowhere near previous episodes of decorrelation – and a lot more brief. Sure, Bitcoin raced upward further than the Nasdaq post-SVB, but it also fell further prior to the guarantee that deposits backing the second largest stablecoin, USD Coin, were safe. In reality, Bitcoin did what it has been doing – sold off more aggressively and then bounced back stronger. Because, well, it is riskier.  

    Besides, the elephant in the room is the Federal Reserve. Markets have been moving off expectations of Fed policy all year long, and this was the true cause of the movement in March, as well as this week. 

    With SVB’s collapse, the market reacted to the announcement of a large liquidity injection by the Fed, as well as the expectation that rates could not be hiked as much in future as a result of the creaking banking system. These are both good things for risk assets and so Bitcoin rose. Again, not because of any potential downfall of the fiat system. 

    Not to mention, these banking problems were borne out of duration risk management, completely distinct to the banking issues of the GFC in 2008, which were a full-blown insolvency crisis built upon terrible underlying assets (subprime mortgages). Today, the banking crisis is still a crisis, but a regional one borne out of the most aggressive hiking cycle in recent memory, which has seen bank assets dropping in value and deposits pulled to take advantage of those higher rates elsewhere, leading to an unsustainable bank run as confidence evaporates. 

    We have seen similar developments again this time around, as First Republic Bank fell last week after revealing it saw over $1 billion of withdrawal requests last quarter. 

    Again, the market reacted to these things breaking by saying: “OK, the Fed cannot hike much more. This is good for risk assets”. Looking at Fed fund probabilities, there is the expectation of a 25 bps hike today (May 3rd) and then….nothing. The market is viewing this as the final hike. 

    So, it is important to keep track of lurking variables (interest rate policy) when assessing correlations and trying to garner why Bitcoin is moving. For the time being, the numbers are pretty clear, and the conclusion is unequivocal: Bitcoin is trading like a risk asset. Perhaps we don’t even need to look at correlation. Take a glance at the below chart plotting Bitcoin’s returns since the start of 2022 against the Nasdaq. Do you really want to argue that these assets are uncorrelated?

    The numbers speak for themselves. Again, this is not speculating about what will happen in future. Tomorrow, Bitcoin could go to $1 million and the Nasdaq could go to zero for all I care. Bitcoin may one day reach that uncorrelated store of value status. But for now, the numbers are clear: it is trading like a risk asset. 

    Source link