iEthereum Advocacy Trust Open Letter to Richard Heart

Dear readers of this article and advocates of iEthereum, Free Speech, and Justice,

In an era where foundational principles are often tested and justice appears uncertain, our collective stand becomes all the more vital. With a resolute commitment to the ideals of free speech, immutability, transparency, censorship resistance, and open-source integrity, the iEthereum Advocacy Trust wholeheartedly supports Richard Heart and the totality of his innovative ecosystem.

The iEthereum Advocacy Trust is writing this open letter to publicly express our distaste for the evolving crypto space and the prevailing mentality to pick winners over losers without adhering to common principles. We have growing concerns that everyone should be aware of and to fight against.

I am not writing this particular letter as an individual, but as the editor-in-chief of the iEthereum Advocacy Trust, a self organizing collective that believes in true decentralized, transparent and immutable open-source software as fundamental principles of cryptocurrency, distributed ledger and blockchain technology. We view these technologies as forms of freedom of speech, freedom of movement and the right to transact.

We are not the founders of iEthereum but we have supported this project because it is published immutable code that aligns with these philosophical tenets of blockchain technology.

Today, we face a world full of illusions and corruptness, especially concerning money. This threatens the most important social contract in human history; the Bill of Rights.

Distributed ledger and blockchain technology present an inevitable solution that intersects with current challenges through the framework of Problem, Reaction, Solution.

We have a choice; do we embrace the solution or not?

This technology will either free us or enslave us. This is a fundamental truth.

The outcome is up to us. What will we accept?

The iEthereum Advocacy Trust supports the idea that the market, not the SEC, should decide our future with these emerging technologies. We understand that investor damages are inevitable regardless of regulatory enforcement or lack thereof. The responsibility should fall on the investor, not a corrupt government authority that picks and chooses winners and losers. Allowing a government agency to overreach its authority, selectively choosing and loosely interpreting policy will lead to future enslavement.

Currently, there are several legislative options to create or overturn rules, laws and regulations governing the crypto markets. One recent example is the Senate’s overturning of SAB 121, a SEC Bulletin that prevented banks from offering digital asset custody services. We are not here to delve into the politics or legal nuances. Instead, we are signaling that we are watching the outcomes of these proposals. Do they grant us more freedom or less?

This understanding brings us to Richard Heart, Hex, Pulsechain and Pulsex, currently under an SEC shakedown investigation. Based on the SEC litigation release, there are several allegations against each entity, each brought forth under the guise of protecting investors, even though there were no victims before the charges.

Do we have more freedom or less freedom since these actions have taken place?

Richard Heart, as an individual, has the right to create computer code, software, technology that he believes solves problems and has product market fit.

However, whether Hex, Pulsechain or Pulsex as products have any “rights” is a subject of legal and philosophical debate. Generally speaking, computer code has been protected under the First Amendment of the United States. Richard Heart is entitled to his right to create the products, and the products’ existence is a consequence of this entitlement.

However, in reality, the government often attempts to encroach on our rights. This highlights the importance of a balance of power within the government structure. The Securities Exchange Commission has been asked for clarification on its policies regarding cryptocurrencies for years. Without this clarification, the SEC is able to pick winners and losers case by case. This is unhealthy and does not foster long-term economic success or industry innovation. It mirrors the practice of authoritarian regimes and is dangerous; This outcome is something the iEthereum Advocacy Trust stands against.

The current SEC policy governing whether a cryptocurrency is a security is the Howey Test. This test is likely outdated regarding cryptocurrency. This should not be the problem of investors, businesses or the public. The crux of the issue is that the SEC has been asked for years to update and clarify policies, allowing innovators to build without fear of government retaliation. If the political will to clarify the laws is absent; the policy remains as it is.

So, whether the Howey test is appropriate for modern day cryptocurrencies or not, it is the current law.

There are many intricacies to the Richard Heart case, as well as many others that we will not comment on at this time. We are not lawyers.

What we will comment on is the Howey test itself. The Howey test is the legal framework that the U.S. Supreme Court uses to determine if a transaction is an investment contract and should be regulated. The Howey test determines if a transaction is an investment contract if it meets ALL four criteria:

• It is an investment of money

• The investment of money is in a common enterprise

• There is an expectation of profits from the investment of money

• If any profit from the investment of money comes from the work or efforts of founder, team members, developers, marketers or other 3rd parties affiliated with the common enterprise.

It is important to note that ALL criteria must be met for an investment to be declared a security. Not one or two but ALL. This is where picking winners and losers without policy clarification becomes dangerous.

The iEthereum Advocacy Trust advocates for decentralized open-source projects, like iEthereum, BTC, Ethereum, Hex, Pulsechain (a copy of Ethereum), Pulsex and so many others.

If projects are decentralized, there is no investment of money in a common enterprise. Many cryptos, like Hex, are products, not enterprises.

If the projects are truly open-source and/or immutable; any profit does not come from the work of project founders, developers or team members.

We write this letter to publicly support Richard Heart and his ingenuity in the face of SEC persecution.

We do not support the mentality of cheering on the downfall of a person or project, especially those with good intent and heart. Pun intended. Richard Heart has helped many people and provides optimism and hope while attempting to make this world a better place. This is about our future and the freedoms we will proclaim.

Like him or hate him; Richard Schueler, aka Richard Heart has created a crypto ecosystem, that in the opinion of the iEthereum Advocacy Trust, should be embraced as a positive form of freedom of choice, speech, ingenuity, movement, transaction, financial inclusion, creativity, and thought.

The iEthereum Advocacy Trust proudly nominates Richard Heart for the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences through this public open letter. We recognize his groundbreaking innovation with Hex, the first instance on this planet of successfully monetizing time on the blockchain. We believe his pioneering work deserves this esteemed recognition and not persecution. Furthermore, we encourage every viable blockchain or distributed ledger technology with the capacity to incorporate Hex into their framework to seek Richard’s advisement. Doing so will not only enhance the long-term viability of their respective networks but also benefit users worldwide. We would love to see Hex available on iEthereum. That would be awesome.

Blockchain technology can either free us or enslave us. Having the freedom of choice in adopting this technology is a crucial first step towards achieving freedom for the future.

In solidarity and determination,

Knive Spiel, founder of the iEthereum Advocacy Trust concept