CoinVoice has recently learned that a participant in the Aave DAO has raised a question: 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 the Aave DAO should initiate a "poison pill" lawsuit to take control of Aave Labs' intellectual property (including its published code and brand trademarks) as well as company equity. This move aims to replace the control of the lending protocol and consolidate the ownership of all AAVE token holders. This "sovereignty declaration" marks an escalation in the ongoing discussions among Aave community members about how to allocate protocol revenue and which organization ultimately controls Aave. Tulipking wrote in his proposal: "This is a defensive 'poison pill' plan designed to protect the DAO from centralized control and ensure that all value flows back to AAVE holders." Aave Labs has privatized assets that should belong to the community by monetizing the Aave brand, frontend, and user base without DAO approval. If Labs is unwilling to voluntarily share revenue and control, then the DAO must reclaim everything. In addition to fully controlling Aave's intellectual property, tulipking also proposed to recover "all past revenues generated by Aave Labs from Aave brand products" and take over the company's equity, effectively transforming "Aave Labs into a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DAO." [Original link]
