On March 13, the Ethereum Foundation published a 38-page document outlining its organizational direction, built around principles the foundation calls CROPS: censorship resistance, open source, privacy, and security. Buried inside was the Source Seppuku License, a passage invoking a historical Japanese ritual suicide practice, presented alongside cartoon cats and anime-style imagery on the official ethereum.org page.
The passage states that an actor who fails to uphold the license’s pledges, or who alters or removes the license, must take their own life with a sword. According to the complaint, foundation representatives later told employees the language was “part of the artwork,” a cultural reference, and “not meant to be taken literally.”
According to reporting, the employee commitment form was subsequently revised to clarify that affirmation had “nothing to do with literal seppuku.” That revision came after employees had already raised objections about the affirmation requirement and the passage’s language.
The Six Days That Shape the Complaint
A cancer diagnosis, a staff letter signed by 53 employees, and two terminations 30 minutes apart all occurred within a span of roughly two weeks.
Kayleen Fulton, who led the Protocol Support team and facilitated All Core Developers calls under the name “Nixo,” received an ovarian-cancer diagnosis on March 19, according to the complaint. She disclosed it to foundation leadership on March 24 and asked that her employment status not change.
One day later, Fulton and colleague Trent Van Epps sent leadership a letter signed by 53 Protocol-cluster employees. The letter supported the Mandate’s general direction but objected to requiring affirmation under threat of termination, according to the complaint.
At least one employee had asked whether signing required suicide; another referenced a colleague who had died by suicide, according to the complaint. On April 6, Co-Executive Director Bastian Aue fired Fulton and Van Epps roughly 30 minutes apart. According to the complaint, Aue told Fulton her performance record and peer support were strong but offered no reason for the dismissal.
What Buterin Allegedly Said
Fulton’s account of a conversation with Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin forms a central part of her retaliation allegation.
Fulton alleges she later spoke with Buterin, who warned that rewarding employees for “making a stink” could encourage similar pressure campaigns, according to the complaint. These remain allegations, not adjudicated facts.
Thirteen days passed between Fulton’s cancer disclosure and her termination. Timing alone does not prove unlawful discrimination or retaliation, but courts weigh it alongside evidence about decision-makers’ knowledge, stated reasons, and how comparable employees were treated.
The Legal Claims and What Remains Unproven
The complaint names six defendants and raises claims under federal disability and medical-leave law, as well as related Colorado statutes.
Fulton filed a federal complaint on November 4, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. She alleges disability discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, interference and retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act, and related Colorado claims.
Defendants include two Ethereum Foundation entities, employer-of-record firms Lightsource HR Global and Vensure Employer Services, Aue, and Buterin. Lawyers representing Ethereum Asia Pacific denied allegations of unlawful conduct, retaliation, and wrongful termination in correspondence with Fulton’s attorneys, according to reporting. The foundation, Aue, and Buterin had not issued public statements at the time of publication.
The Governance Gap This Exposes
This case surfaces a structural question that any decentralized tech organization with U.S.-based workers should take seriously.
Employment responsibility here is distributed across Swiss and Singapore entities alongside employer-of-record firms. When something goes wrong for a U.S.-based worker, which organization is actually accountable?
Organizations operating across multiple jurisdictions need documented processes for handling disability disclosure, staff organizing, and governance disagreement before those gaps surface in federal court. The litigation may test whether those processes were adequate.
