Bitcoin influencer Joshua Henslee released a new video giving his opinion on the verdict in Granath v Wright in Norway. He thought it was illogical, contradictory, and outrageous.
It’s morally wrong to say what Hodlonaut said
Henslee begins by pointing out that, regardless of what the ruling in the defamation case was, it was wrong to say the thing Granath said about Dr. Wright—that he’s a scammer, a fraud, and mentally ill.
Henslee delves into the question of the legalities in the video, but he wanted to make this point at the start.
The ruling did not address whether Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto
Henslee highlights that the judge did not rule whether Dr. Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. This was Granath’s main argument because, in his view, Dr. Wright is not Nakamoto; what he said was true and was, therefore, not defamatory. However, in reality, the ruling takes a position on this many times.
“I feel this ruling is just all kinds of crazy,” Henslee says, noting that the ruling brought it up seven times despite saying it would not take a position on the issue. To him, this is blatantly contradictory.
Why the court didn’t think Granath defamed Dr. Wright
The first point was that Granath only had 8,000 Twitter followers then and used hashtags that weren’t that popular. Since he deleted his tweets, not that many people saw them. Henslee points out that in real life, bullying can be done by one person, or it can be done by five; it doesn’t matter how many people saw it.
As for Granath’s claim that Dr. Wright is mentally ill, Henslee is shocked that the court let this slide. In this day and age, you could be fired for calling someone that or anything similar.
“It’s amazing that this is tolerated when it’s not tolerated in society today,” Henslee says.
The ruling also points out that Dr. Wright himself uses harsh language on social media. Henslee acknowledges this and thinks it’s a risk his legal team should have been more aware of. However, he’s shocked that this was even brought up in the ruling, given that it is irrelevant to whether Granath defamed Dr. Wright.
The judgment blatantly contradicts itself
Henslee read the judgment in full, and he says that it blatantly said that accusing someone of criminal activity is defamatory. Yet, Granath called Dr. Wright a fraud multiple times. How is this not defamatory?
Social media and society
Henslee notes that there’s a big difference in how we use social media today compared to how we used it 20 years ago. In his view, it has morphed into a social evil, and he has unfollowed most accounts on social platforms and cut down his usage.
One of the things mentioned in the ruling was that what Granath said was okay because everyone uses social media this way. Henslee can understand but disagrees. In his view, the person making this argument simply does not understand social media or the impact it can have.
Key takeaways from this video
- Magnus Granath won the defamation trial against Dr. Craig Wright in Norway. The judge did not find that he defamed Dr. Wright by calling him a scammer, a fraud, and mentally ill.
- However, the judgment was contradictory, full of logical fallacies, and clearly written up by someone who did not understand social media or what happened.
- Dr. Wright will now appeal this judgment as he feels it was a mistake. Furthermore, the U.K. case still has to take place.
Watch Granath vs Wright Satoshi Norway Trial Coverage Livestream Recaps on the CoinGeek YouTube channel.
New to blockchain? Check out CoinGeek’s Blockchain for Beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about blockchain technology.
