Wright & Ors v BTC Core & Ors (Rev1) [2023] EWCA Civ 868 (20 July 2023)

Wright & Ors v BTC Core & Ors (Rev1) [2023] EWCA Civ 868 (20 July 2023)

The Bitcoin File Format, as pleaded, is not a work in which copyright subsists because there is no evidence that the format itself was ever fixed as a work, rather than merely instantiated in the operation of the software. The blocks in the blockchain reflect the format but do not themselves record the format as a work. The requirement of fixation under section 3(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is not satisfied. Therefore, the claimants have no real prospect of establishing copyright subsistence in the Bitcoin File Format.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Civ 868
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Dr Craig Steven Wright; Claimant/appellant: Wright International Investments Limited; Claimant/appellant: Wright International Investments UK Limited; Defendant/respondent: BTC Core (A Partnership); Defendant/respondent: Wladimir Jasper van der Laan; Defendant/respondent: Jonas Schnelli; Defendant/respondent: Pieter Wuille; Defendant/respondent: Marco Patrick Falke; Defendant/respondent: Samuel Dobson; Defendant/respondent: Michael Rohan Ford; Defendant/respondent: Cory Fields; Defendant/respondent: George Michael Dombrowski; Defendant/respondent: Matthew Gregory Corallo; Defendant/respondent: Peter Todd; Defendant/respondent: Gregory Fulton Maxwell; Defendant/respondent: Eric Lombrozo; Defendant/respondent: John Newbery; Defendant/respondent: Peter John Bushnell; Defendant/respondent: Block, Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Spiral BTC, Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Square Up Europe Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Blockstream Corporation Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Chaincode Labs, Inc; Defendant/respondent: Coinbase Global Inc.; Defendant/respondent: CB Payments, Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Coinbase Europe Limited; Defendant/respondent: Coinbase Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Crypto Open Patent Alliance; Defendant/respondent: Squareup International Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Court Order Refusing Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction for Copyright Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Copyright Subsistence, Fixation Requirement, Computer Programs, Database Rights, Jurisdiction, Originality, File Format Protection
Intellectual Property Copyright Law Civil Procedure Copyright Subsistence Fixation Requirement Computer Programs Database Rights Jurisdiction +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Craig Steven Wright

Claimant/appellant

Wright International Investments Limited

Claimant/appellant

Wright International Investments UK Limited

Claimant/appellant

BTC Core (A Partnership)

Defendant/respondent

Wladimir Jasper van der Laan

Defendant/respondent

Jonas Schnelli

Defendant/respondent

Pieter Wuille

Defendant/respondent

Marco Patrick Falke

Defendant/respondent

Samuel Dobson

Defendant/respondent

Michael Rohan Ford

Defendant/respondent

Cory Fields

Defendant/respondent

George Michael Dombrowski

Defendant/respondent

Matthew Gregory Corallo

Defendant/respondent

Peter Todd

Defendant/respondent

Gregory Fulton Maxwell

Defendant/respondent

Eric Lombrozo

Defendant/respondent

John Newbery

Defendant/respondent

Peter John Bushnell

Defendant/respondent

Block, Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Spiral BTC, Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Square Up Europe Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Blockstream Corporation Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Chaincode Labs, Inc

Defendant/respondent

Coinbase Global Inc.

Defendant/respondent

CB Payments, Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Coinbase Europe Limited

Defendant/respondent

Coinbase Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Crypto Open Patent Alliance

Defendant/respondent

Squareup International Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Court Order Refusing Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction for Copyright Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does copyright subsist in the Bitcoin File Format under UK law?
  2. 2 Has the fixation requirement under section 3(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 been satisfied for the Bitcoin File Format?
  3. 3 Is the Bitcoin File Format an original literary work?

Ratio Decidendi

The Bitcoin File Format, as pleaded, is not a work in which copyright subsists because there is no evidence that the format itself was ever fixed as a work, rather than merely instantiated in the operation of the software. The blocks in the blockchain reflect the format but do not themselves record the format as a work. The requirement of fixation under section 3(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is not satisfied. Therefore, the claimants have no real prospect of establishing copyright subsistence in the Bitcoin File Format.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Refusal of permission to serve claim form out of jurisdiction for the claim of copyright infringement in the Bitcoin File Format is upheld.