You're both right and wrong.

Here is a summary of cases recently at play.

1. Wright defamation lawsuit against a podcaster. (UK)

2. Wright defamation lawsuit against a bitcoin fan. (UK)

3. Bitcoin fan's declaratory judgement claim over wright's threats of defamation litigation (the case above). (Norway)

4. Wright lawsuit against Bitcoin.org for copyright infringement for distributing the Bitcoin whitepaper (UK).

5. Wright lawsuit against a dozen current and former Bitcoin developers for failing to backdoor the Bitcoin system to enable Wright to "recover" billions of dollars of coins he says are his. Wright claimed he was owed billions of pounds of damages for this failure. (UK)

6. Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA) declaratory judgement claim against Wright triggered by threats of copyright infringement claims for distributing the bitcoin whitepaper. (UK)

7. Wright's lawsuit against 14 current and former Bitcoin developers and a number of Bitcoin related companies for infringing his copyright in the "Bitcoin block file format", copyright in the Bitcoin whitepaper (because there is a copy in the blockchain), and his database rights to the Bitcoin blockchain. This case claimed damages in the hundreds of billions of pounds. (UK)

Here is how they've played out and interacted: 1. Podcaster was bankrupt, abandoned his defense, Wright won but was only awarded 1 pound in damages because he lied about how he was harmed. Podcaster left with utterly ruinous legal fees, health compromised, etc.

2. / 3. Norway case was intended to preempt UK case due to very bad UK defamation laws. But Brexit happened and the Norway case no longer preempted and the Bitcoin fan had to face litigation in both jurisdictions. Defeated Wright in Norway, but Wright was granted an appeal which due to how the law works in Norway would essentially be a retrial. UK version of the case case gets stayed on the Norway appeal (but only after huge costs. Wright's target, a school teacher, was forced to abandon his career due to the time imposition. Norway appeal gets held pending COPA case by mutual agreement.

4. Bitcoin.org owner is pseudonymous, Wright and associates made various violent threats. Credible fear that absurd lawsuit was just to determine his location in order to make threats more coercive. In the UK you cannot defend yourself against a claim without identifying yourself (unlike the US where anonymous speech is connected to your 1A rights), so he lost by default. Website operator is ordered to pay nearly a million dollars in "costs" for his unopposed default and is unable to appeal the costs for the same reason as caused the default. Appealed, lost, Appealed to the UK supreme court, but lost. Bitcoin whitepaper and software were restricted on bitcoin.org.

5. Wright defeated on jurisdiction grounds. Successful appeal. Case ordered to be split into a preliminary issue trial for him to prove he ever owned coins in question. Wright abandoned the case after three years and millions spend on both sides a day before his disclosure for the preliminary issue trial was due. Court made a followup ruling that his case was completely without merit.

6. 7. A preliminary issue trial in ordered for 7 on the question of Wright being Bitcoin's creator, since he couldn't own those rights without being. This is merged into the COPA declaratory judgement case which is over the same question. This merged trial is called the "identity trial" in much of the documentation.

So this is why there is why there is some confusion as to Wright being the claimant or the defendant in the recent trial: He was both, claimant with respect to 7 and defendant with respect to 6, and the trial was jointly a trial of both cases.

At the conclusion of the joint trial, which found Wright's claims to be fraudulent, 6,7 were lost. The court also acted to eradicate the outstanding costs in cases 1, 4. Wright abandoned cases 2 and 3.

Wright is appealing the identity trial currently. You can take a look at his new twitter account for an idea of how that's going: https://x.com/CsTominaga/with_replies

[I'm a defendant in 5 and 6]