The Bitcoin community is once again stirred by the activities of nChain, specifically surrounding European Patent 3643046, set to be granted on June 26, 2024. This patent, titled “Methods and Systems for a Consistent Distributed Memory Pool in a Blockchain Network,” is the latest in a series of intellectual property claims by nChain, a company closely associated with Craig Wright.
Wright, who has repeatedly claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin, has been conclusively proven to be a fraud by a UK court. A fact that puts a question mark in everything he has done in the past and anything he plans for the future.
The cases of these patents are being closely followed by at least two dedicated Bitcoiners that have devoted time and resources to oppose them.
Leading UK patent attorney David Pearce (aka Dr Tufty Sylvestris) has been closely following the COPA vs Wright trial in the High Court in London. Pearce is a highly skilled patent attorney with extensive experience. His qualifications include a PhD in Management of Intellectual Property, an MSc in Intellectual Property, and an MEng in Electronic and Structural Materials Engineering from prestigious institutions such as the University of Birmingham and the University of Oxford.
David has a notable track record in defending European patents against opposition attacks and is cited in a referral to the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal. In case you missed him during the trial in the Rolls Building, you might have come across his informed commentary on Twitter. Mr Pearce has been working on a number of patent cases involving Craig Wright.
The second person involved, is investigative journalist Arthur Van Pelt.
Arthur is a notable figure in the blockchain community, particularly recognized for his persistent efforts to debunk the claims of Craig Wright, who has repeatedly asserted that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin. Van Pelt, a Dutch Bitcoin enthusiast, has dedicated a significant amount of his time, and large part of his life, to researching and publicly challenging Wright’s assertions.
Van Pelt’s plethora of contributions are largely driven by his will to protect Bitcoin and his unwavering belief that Wright’s claims were fraudulent. He has been vocal on social media and other platforms, often sharing detailed analyses and critiques debunking Wright’s claims and shining light on his actions. His work includes publishing numerous articles and engaging in thousands of online debates to expose inconsistencies and fabrications in Wright’s narrative.
In addition to his advocacy against Wright, Van Pelt has played a crucial role in legal battles concerning nChain’s patents. For instance, he was instrumental in opposing and eventually leading to the revocation of nChain’s European patent EP3449450, demonstrating his commitment to ensuring the integrity of the blockchain patent landscape.
Arthur has also written about the fraudulent nature of Craig Wright’s copyright registration for the Bitcoin whitepaper at the U.S. Copyright Office. He has expressed his intention to pursue legal action against Craig Wright to rectify the situation at the U.S. Copyright Office, especially if the issue is not resolved following the COPA vs. Wright trial.
All this effort is part of a broader community initiative to prevent the monopolization of blockchain technologies through dubious patent and copyright claims.
Understanding the Patent
European Patent 3643046 claims to solve scalability issues in blockchain networks, potentially targeting the creation of an exchange for Bitcoin SV (BSV). It proposes a system where a distributed memory pool (DMP) is implemented using a distributed hash table (DHT), aiming to enhance transaction processing speeds.
Despite these technical assertions, the patent’s novelty and true innovation remain questionable, especially in light of the broader blockchain community’s advancements in similar areas.
Craig Wright’s Legal Defeats
The UK High Court has categorically ruled that Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto, debunking his long-standing claims. In a decisive judgment in March 2024, Mr Justice James Mellor stated that Wright is not the author of the Bitcoin white paper or the creator of Bitcoin. The court found overwhelming evidence that Wright had lied extensively about his involvement in Bitcoin’s creation, undermining his credibility and intentions behind his numerous patent filings.
Implications for the Blockchain Community
Wright’s aggressive pursuit of blockchain patents, despite his fraudulent claims, raises significant concerns. These patents, including EP 3643046, could potentially stifle innovation by creating legal barriers for developers and startups. The patent’s upcoming opposition period, ending on March 26, 2025, provides an opportunity for the community to challenge its validity.
This period is crucial for ensuring that the patent system is not misused to monopolize foundational blockchain technologies under false pretenses. Pearce and Van Pelt are the two people that really understand that.
Ethical and Strategic Concerns
nChain’s strategy of amassing blockchain patents under Wright’s tainted legacy poses ethical questions. The use of questionable claims to secure patents not only disrupts the open-source ethos of the blockchain community but also risks creating a chilling effect on innovation.
Bitcoin companies and independent developers might face legal threats, hindering their ability to contribute to blockchain’s growth and evolution.
The Truth Persists
Arthur Van Pelt’s unwavering commitment to truth has earned him a reputation among Bitcoin maximalists and the wider blockchain community. His relentless efforts to expose fraudulent claims and ensure transparency helped to safeguard the space from what has proved to be a very dangerous individual.
The necessity for such actions is further emphasized by the impending grant of European Patent 3643046 to nChain, tainted by the discredited assertions of Craig Wright. As the opposition period for the patent draws near, stakeholders must thoroughly scrutinize its claims and consider challenging its validity to safeguard the integrity of Bitcoin and blockchain innovation.
For those that think this is a nothing burger, this situation serves as a reminder of the past, where initial dismissals of Wright’s dubious claims ultimately led to potentially the largest attempted fraud in history. Remaining vigilant to protect the future of blockchain technology, might need to be a shared responsibility going forward.
Author Profile
- Lucy Walker covers finance, health and beauty since 2014. She has been writing for various online publications.
Latest entries
- March 7, 2025SatoshiCraig Wright Banned from UK Courts with Civil Restraint Order
- February 19, 2025BitcoinThe Rise of State-Level Strategic Bitcoin Reserves
- February 1, 2025NewsWireThe Financial Impact of Mizotakis Resigning in Greece
- January 20, 2025Global EconomicsAI, Robotics & the Future of Cheap Production