As a delegate and service provider within the Aave DAO, we work closely with other service providers, investors, and delegates, and would like to share our perspective on the proposed transfer of brand, trademarks, and intellectual property from various service providers to a dedicated entity.
We support the strategic alignment of the Aave brand, trademarks, and intellectual property with $AAVE token holders, as outlined in the Aave 2030 roadmap. The current proposal is disconnected from the intended roadmap whilst reflecting a high-level, directional expression of intent with the material implementation details deferred to the future. In our view, this aligns more closely with the purpose of a TEMP CHECK rather than an ARFC. Any subsequent phase that introduces concrete legal structures, execution paths, or asset transfers should be progressed through an ARFC once sufficient detail is available given the magnitude of this proposal.
Based on the information shared by @LlamaRisk and informed by legal opinions obtained prior to commenting, we believe that the transfer of licenses, trademarks, and brand identity requires a carefully structured and professionally governed process. Within the DAO, only a limited number of stakeholders possess the requisite legal and operational expertise to oversee such a transition. As such, we strongly recommend that the in-house legal counsel of both LlamaRisk and Aave Labs be deeply engaged throughout the process.
While it may be possible to manage this process internally, given the context, visibility, and precedent this action would set for the broader industry, we believe it would be prudent to engage an independent legal firm with appropriate experience. This firm should be mandated to scope and advise on the transfer together with the legal counsel’s of both LlamaRisk and Aave Labs. Given the significance of the outcome, it is reasonable to expect that any resulting legal analysis or recommendations, once made public, would be subject to rigorous external scrutiny.
As highlighted by @sakulstra, this proposal affects the work of multiple service providers, not solely Aave Labs, whose contributions may ultimately be transferred to a new entity. The outcome of this discussion has implications for all service providers and therefore warrants deeper, more explicit discussion around the scope of services currently being delivered.
Of particular importance is the ownership and governance of the aave.com and app.aave.com websites. These assets sit at the intersection of protocol strategy, product strategy, and brand stewardship, and any changes to their control raise broader questions regarding the long-term vision and operating model of Aave. Deciding how these assets are operated sets a precedence for future innovation amongst builders within the community.
In summary, given the legal and operational complexity of what is being proposed, we believe the proposal should be amended prior to advancing to a vote. We respectfully suggest the following:
- Reclassify from ARFC to TEMP CHECK: This more accurately reflects the current high-level, directional nature of the discussion.
- Assign Clear Ownership: In the absence of defined Phase II owner (or owners), a named lead or accountable owner should be appointed to coordinate the initiative, define scope, and outline concrete next steps before escalation to an ARFC.
We believe these changes will strengthen the governance process and materially reduce execution and legal risk for the DAO.
We recognise that this is a complex and sensitive moment for all parties involved. We are confident that, through deliberate governance and good-faith collaboration, the DAO and relevant stakeholders can align on a solution that best serves the long-term interests of Aave.