Our courts have happily convicted scammers, impersonators, and other fraud with less smoking gun evidence against them than already exists against Mr. Wright. They're just really slow about it. The fact that in the short term he's continuing unabated in the civil courts really doesn't say anything about his long term prospects, and every lie he tells in service of the short term is a chain the reduces his (already dismal) chances in the long run.

That said, at best fighting him this way will be slow and painful. But ultimately, we have to play the hand we're holding and continuing to ignoring him while he rips apart Bitcoin isn't a reasonable option for the community or for the people's he's targeting.

If I had a time machine and could go back to 2016 and somehow convince people that the community needed to visibly reject and rebut his claims forcefully instead of just ignoring him so that today lawyers, courts, and the victims funding him would be more likely to see his claims as completely meritless I would. Alas.

It was Wright that forced the matter into court, not the Bitcoin community-- Civil courts aren't generally equip to adjudicate matters of abstract truth, certainly not efficiently. The UK is internationally infamous for having a system which is vulnerable to abuse, so once Wright began proceedings in the UK Hodl took good legal advice to seek a declaratory judgement in order to preempt and domesticate the action, unfortunately Wright was able to counter the move by pleading that his lawsuit in the UK was exclusively for damage in the UK while the Norwegian action would deal with matters world wide.

There is a real possibility-- likelihood in fact-- that the courts will rule "We're not here or equipt to decide who is or who isn't Satoshi,