Paul Sztorc Defends eCash Hard Fork Plan, Denies 'Stealing' Satoshi's Coins

Sztorc Clarifies eCash Token Distribution

Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc has responded to a wave of backlash from the Bitcoin community regarding his eCash hard fork proposal. His core argument: the project does not seize any of Satoshi Nakamoto's BTC — instead, it allocates 600,000 eCash tokens to Bitcoin's creator in the new network.

«To clear things up: We do not take any of Satoshi's BTC. We gift Satoshi 600,000 eCash, instead of gifting 1.1M. That is 600k more than Satoshi got from Litecoin, Ethereum, Solana, Tether, etc (ie, 0). Our coins are not named "BTC", they are named eCash.» — Paul Sztorc (@Truthcoin), original post

Why This Matters

Sztorc's proposal touches one of the most sensitive subjects in the Bitcoin ecosystem — the inviolability of wallets believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto. Any attempt to redistribute these assets, even within a separate blockchain, is perceived by a significant portion of the community as a violation of the foundational principle of property rights in crypto. The debate unfolds alongside parallel controversy over BIP-361, a draft proposal by Jameson Lopp and a group of experts to freeze coins vulnerable to quantum computing attacks, published in mid-April.

How the Token Allocation Works

Sztorc's project proposes relaunching Bitcoin while preserving the network's core architecture. Every BTC holder would receive an equivalent amount of eCash. However, the coins presumed to belong to Nakamoto would be handled differently: out of approximately 1.1 million BTC attributed to Bitcoin's creator, only 600,000 eCash would be allocated to Satoshi, while the remaining 500,000 would be directed toward ecosystem development.

According to Sztorc, this approach is necessary to prevent the fork from becoming a "zombie project" — a network that exists without genuine participant activity or developer support. Channeling part of the funds toward development would create economic incentives for building a viable community around eCash.

Community Reaction and Sztorc's Rebuttal

The Bitcoin community responded with sharp criticism. The primary objection: redistributing funds in a new blockchain still violates the principle of property rights, even if the tokens technically belong to a different network.

Sztorc countered that the eCash tokens in question are not actual bitcoins but merely emission rules within an entirely new blockchain. He also pointed out that a significant portion of early BTC is likely lost forever, as those coins have not moved in over a decade.

The developer separately noted that inaccurate information has been circulating amid the heated discussion around his proposal, making it difficult to have a constructive conversation about the project's technical merits.

Broader Context: The Debate Over Dormant Coins

Sztorc's initiative is not the only recent attempt to address inactive bitcoins. In mid-April, Jameson Lopp and a group of specialists published BIP-361, a draft proposal to freeze coins potentially vulnerable to quantum computers. Both proposals have sparked intense disagreement and raise a fundamental question for the crypto community: how to balance network security with digital property rights.