Craig Wright could not overturn the verdict on the claim of the creator of Bitcoin

Australian scientist Craig Wrights, the self-acclaimed developer of Bitcoin, has tried to overturn an earlier ruling at the UK Court of Appeal in his legal battle with the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA).

This ruling reinforces an earlier conviction that Wright failed to prove he was Satoshi Nakamoto, the anonymous creator of Bitcoin.

The court approved a decision on Wright's Bitcoin copyright claim

In the year On November 28, the court dismissed Wright's appeal, saying the claims lacked merit. Lord Justice Arnold declared that there was no reasonable prospect of success and there was no justification for a hearing. Wright's evidence was deemed insufficient to support his claim to be the author of the Bitcoin white paper.

The first ruling, handed down after a 22-day trial earlier this year, concluded that Wright had failed to substantiate his claims of authorship of the October 2008 Bitcoin white paper. Expert testimony and circumstantial evidence presented during the trial were in stark contrast to their statements. Dissatisfied with the outcome, Wright sought an appeal but failed to provide compelling reasons for reconsideration.

BitMEX Research reports that Wright's appeal alleges judicial bias and improper handling of evidence. However, the court found these charges to be supported by evidence. Lord Justice Arnold suggested that Wright's claims reflected disagreements with the judge's reasoning rather than actual or overt bias.

The ruling indicated that the trial judge found that Wright had a fair trial and rejected the procedural unfairness claims.

“Dr. Wright accused the judge of bias, but this charge is baseless. No credible allegations or substantive charges have been made by Dr. Wright, but there are consistent disagreements with the judge's reasoning. In fact, the judge went out of his way to ensure that Dr. Wright received a fair trial. So is the allegation of procedural injustice,” the judgment stated.

Additionally, the court rejected Wright's criticism of the handling of expert evidence. The court noted that Wright's experts largely agreed with the COPA witnesses on key points, which undermined the arguments. Wright decided not to call certain witnesses or cross-examine others, further weakening his case.

“Dr. Wright argues that the judge should have treated himself as an expert, but because (i) Dr. Wright was the primary fact witness and (ii) a suitably qualified expert, the judge was justified in not treating him as a substitute expert witness,” the ruling added.

Meanwhile, Wright's legal action was dismissed with a court hearing scheduled for December 18. A UK judge ordered Wright to appear in person at the hearing. This development comes from opposition to Jack Dorsey Square and his £900 billion claim on BTC Core. If convicted of contempt, Wright could face jail time or up to two years in prison.