Держатели AAVE отвергли инициативу о передаче интеллектуальной собственности под контроль ДАО Translation: AAVE Holders Rejected Initiative to Transfer Intellectual Property Control to DAO

Participants in the Aave ecosystem voted against a proposal aimed at transferring the brand of the protocol to the management of a decentralized organization.

The voting concluded on December 26. Of the participants, 55.29% of AAVE holders opposed the initiative, 41.21% abstained, and only 3.5% expressed their support.

Proponents of the initiative advocated for the transfer of intellectual property—domains, social media accounts, and trademarks—under the control of a legal entity that would be governed by the DAO. They framed this as a critical step toward brand decentralization.

Tensions between the development company and coin holders escalated following a controversial deal. On December 4, Aave Labs announced a partnership with CoW Swap to «enhance swap pricing and integrate protection against MEV into the protocol’s interface.»

On December 11, a delegate using the alias EzR3aL claimed that fees from the updated swap contracts were now being redirected to a private wallet controlled by Aave Labs. This left the decentralized organization with a significant loss of revenue, leading to community outrage.

Amid this «civil war,» AAVE lost 19% of its value in a week, dropping to approximately $150. By the time of this writing, the asset has slightly rebounded and is now trading around $154.

The results of the vote highlighted a deeper issue—large investors’ dissatisfaction with the governance of the protocol and the distribution of earnings.

Evgeny Gaevoy, founder and CEO of the market maker Wintermute, whose firm opposed the initiative, called for Aave Labs to engage in substantial dialogue about aligning the interests of all stakeholders in the long term.

He noted that this issue is critically important not only for Aave but also for the entire market. Successfully addressing this problem could set a precedent for dozens of other protocols in similar predicaments.

An advisor at Lido, known by the nickname Hasu, described the situation as indicative of a «fundamentally dysfunctional» model—an incompatible coexistence of governance tokens and commercial enterprises.

He stated that this dual structure inevitably creates conflicting incentives, rendering effective protocol governance nearly impossible.

«Investments in a business inherently require trust in the project’s management, and despite the existing legal frameworks on paper, this management practically has unlimited rights to destroy the business. When conflicting incentives from equity structures are added, the complexity becomes insurmountable,» noted Hasu.

The expert acknowledged that such hybrid structures emerged a few years ago as a forced response to the hostile stance of regulators. However, he believes that long-term investors have always viewed them as a temporary compromise.

«As a long-time investor in Aave, I hope that all parties involved can reach an agreement and develop a solution that leads us to a clear model—one where everything is governed by a token or one where a classic equity stake governs everything,» he concluded.

An analyst under the pseudonym Milli labeled the ongoing events as a «bullish signal.»

«The very fact that Aave’s governance continues to spark heated debates and activity—even after years, particularly in an era when governance is largely overlooked—indicates that there is serious value here and that Aave is doing something right,» he commented.

It is noteworthy that Aave’s founder, Stani Kulechov, has been accused of vote buying amounting to $10 million for control over the protocol.