(This post is intended for those who have benefited from my philanthropy, directly or indirectly, through Prometheus Foundation, Objective Standard Institute, the Prometheus Network, or any other organization that received funds from my organizations or from me, personally.)
This post follows my recent post, “The $9 million Heist.” Its purpose is to provide the central facts.
There are thousands of pages of documents, dozens of telephone conversations, and hundreds of in-person and board meetings that provide additional background and context. This post presents only the fundamental facts. If you would like to examine the underlying materials, please request them in the comment section, and I will send them to you.
Craig originally drafted an Advisement Agreement that he, Sarah, Lenny Esmond (our joint accountant at the time), and I signed. The Agreement required OSI to maintain these funds in a segregated investment account. Use of the funds required my approval; without my approval the “funds may not be used”.
On January 26, 2024, Craig confirmed: “The funds are held in trust by OSI, not grants to OSI”—emphasis added.
In the same exchange, Craig wrote: “They are held in trust and may be used only with Carl’s and Lenny’s permission.”
In January 2026, having become concerned with the Biddles’ behavior, I directed OSI to transfer the trust funds and demanded an accounting. Craig refused. On January 12, 2026, using money from the trust, Craig filed suit to seize the $9 million.
Craig now argues that yes, the money was “held in trust” but that no” legal” trust existed, that the funds actually belonged to OSI all along, that the Advisement Agreements are void or unenforceable, and that OSI is at liberty to spend all the money right now.
Sarah Biddle’s sworn declaration confirms that OSI is doing exactly that. She states that OSI has been drawing on the funds “out of necessity” to pay payroll, to cover legal fees, to cover the LevelUp conference-related expenses, and to cover regular operating expenses. She also states that OSI cannot continue operating, or pay its legal fees, without further use of the funds.
Compare what Craig said previously with what he is saying now.
Craig Biddle’s Words—Then
- “The Funds are held in trust by OSI.”
- “The funds are not grants to OSI.”
- “The funds may be used only with Carl’s permission.”
- Without approval, the funds “may not be used.”
Craig Biddle’s Position—Now
- No legal trust exists.
- The funds are outright, unrestricted grants.
- The funds belong to OSI.
- The Agreements are void or unenforceable.
- OSI will spend the funds in order to pay lawyers to get control over those same funds.
If you possess communications, approval records, or other evidence concerning the transfer, or expenditure of these funds, please provide it to Annie Vinther Sanz or Stephanie Williamson.
I will follow this post addressing the Objectivist teachings on “looting” and “mooching,” dependence versus independence, and honesty.
Also, a series on “Making Sense of Craig Biddle” will follow.
I would like to hear from you and answer any questions you may have.
Carl B. Barney
July 1, 2026