$AAVE
The DAO is taking itself too seriously; can an arm twist a thigh?
If anyone should be dismissed, it’s the Ethereum Foundation.
Does the relationship between the Aave protocol, the DAO, and Aave Labs need to be reassessed? User tulipking proposed in a recent governance forum post that AaveDAO should initiate a 'poison pill' lawsuit to take control of Aave Labs' intellectual property (including its published code and brand trademarks) as well as the company’s equity.
This move aims to replace the control over the lending protocol and consolidate the ownership of all AAVE token holders. This 'sovereignty declaration' marks an escalation in the ongoing discussion among Aave community members on how to allocate protocol revenues and which organization ultimately controls Aave. Tulipking wrote in their proposal: 'This is a defensive 'poison pill' plan aimed at protecting the DAO from centralized control and ensuring that all value flows back to AAVE holders.'
Aave Labs, without DAO approval, has effectively privatized assets that should belong to the community by monetizing the Aave brand, frontend, and user base. If Labs is unwilling to voluntarily share revenues and control, then the DAO must reclaim everything.
In addition to fully controlling Aave's intellectual property, tulipking also proposed to reclaim 'all past revenues generated by Aave Labs from Aave branded products' and take over the company's equity, effectively 'turning Aave Labs into a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DAO.'
