TL;DR - yes, probably. What type, that's another question.
Thanks for writing the article. Very useful.
The point about joint liability is a critical one. There is (of course) a DAO of lawyers writing about DAOs that might be of interest as well: medium.com/lexdaoism
FWIW my sense is that one benefit of DAOs does not fully come through in Heather's excellent article is that developers and other contributors c/d earn tokens for contributions. These tokens of course convey voting rights.
A second related benefit is evoked by the phrase "exit to the community." As someone who has helped a few companies decidedly NOT "exit to the community" as a CEO - I really like the idea of pulling something off like Compound, who became a fundamental part of DeFi and essentially did exit to the community and became a DAO. They have achieved what many asipire to via progressive decentralization.
For OSS founders & teams, imagine giving away (airdropping) tokens to useful contributors. Ideally this would be done automatically however one needs to think through the tokenomics and how to not get gamed by bots carefully. So maybe it is integrated into github somehow w/ human in the +1 role. Not sure.
Anyway - then over time you have contributors as you define them being able to vote via a DAO on governance directly. This to me sounds a lot more transparent and inclusive than most OSS governance, which often remains clubby despite our best efforts.
Also, tokens don't necessarily need to be securities. There is something called the Howie test that determines that. For example afaik Compound tokens were not considered securities by the SEC in part because they were distributed for free. That said I'm not a lawyer and law and regulations are evolving.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
A community for COSS builders, founders, consumers, investors, and fans.
TL;DR - yes, probably. What type, that's another question.
Thanks for writing the article. Very useful.
The point about joint liability is a critical one. There is (of course) a DAO of lawyers writing about DAOs that might be of interest as well: medium.com/lexdaoism
FWIW my sense is that one benefit of DAOs does not fully come through in Heather's excellent article is that developers and other contributors c/d earn tokens for contributions. These tokens of course convey voting rights.
A second related benefit is evoked by the phrase "exit to the community." As someone who has helped a few companies decidedly NOT "exit to the community" as a CEO - I really like the idea of pulling something off like Compound, who became a fundamental part of DeFi and essentially did exit to the community and became a DAO. They have achieved what many asipire to via progressive decentralization.
For OSS founders & teams, imagine giving away (airdropping) tokens to useful contributors. Ideally this would be done automatically however one needs to think through the tokenomics and how to not get gamed by bots carefully. So maybe it is integrated into github somehow w/ human in the +1 role. Not sure.
Anyway - then over time you have contributors as you define them being able to vote via a DAO on governance directly. This to me sounds a lot more transparent and inclusive than most OSS governance, which often remains clubby despite our best efforts.
Also, tokens don't necessarily need to be securities. There is something called the Howie test that determines that. For example afaik Compound tokens were not considered securities by the SEC in part because they were distributed for free. That said I'm not a lawyer and law and regulations are evolving.