Ripple CTO David Schwartz, has recently reacted to a recent argument made by Self Proclaimed Satoshi Craig Wright in an X post.
Craig Wright has been embroiled in legal controversies for years, particularly after publicly declaring himself as Satoshi Nakamoto in 2016. Wright has also been involved in lawsuits regarding the intellectual property rights to the Bitcoin whitepaper and Bitcoin code.
In a recent twist, Wright who was discredited in the UK High Court’s ruling against his claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, filed another legal action, targeting the Bitcoin Core developers seeking a staggering £911,050,000,000. Wright contends that the Bitcoin Core developers misrepresented BTC as the original Bitcoin, but he believes that Bitcoin SV, commonly known as BSV, is the actual version of Bitcoin.
Since this claim was filed, Wright has been in the spotlight, arguing his claims on social media in numerous X posts.
Ripple CTO reacts to Craig Wright’s argument
In the most recent interaction X, Wright put forward an argument in suing a partnership. In an X post, Wright wrote “when a partnership is sued, and only one partner steps forward to respond while the others sit back in silence, the situation becomes a textbook case of irresponsibility and lack of foresight.”
Wright went on further to say that “Partnerships unless structured as limited liability partnerships (LLPs) usually operate under joint and several liability. BTC Core is not.”
“This means every partner is on the hook for the full weight of any legal claims or debts. When some partners don’t respond, the court won’t chase them down immediately; instead, they’ll direct their focus on the one partner who did show up,” Wright stated.
Wright’s latest comments aiming to define BTC core attracted attention from the crypto community. An X user replied, “Bitcoin Core isn’t a legally recognized partnership. Contributors to open source projects don’t magically become members of a partnership.”
Ripple CTO David Schwartz reacted to the points raised by Wright saying: “This argument might almost work if you tried to target all bitcoin holders. At least then you can argue that the token represents shares of the partnership and they have agreed to split revenue by token holdings. But even that’s a crazy stretch.”
