A new governance proposal in the Aave community aims to pull the project’s brand fully inside the control of its DAO. The move marks a fresh push to align trademarks, logos and domains with on-chain decision-making rather than with a legacy corporate wrapper.
Aave Proposal Targets Trademarks, Domains and IP
The draft calls for key brand assets, such as the Aave name, logo, associated trademarks, core web domains and certain design elements to sit under structures that the DAO ultimately steers. The proposal’s authors argue that the protocol’s identity should not depend on permissions from any single company or founding team once Aave functions as a mature, decentralized money market.
Under the plan, governance participants would define how to hold these assets in a legally robust vehicle that still respects token-holder votes. That could involve a foundation or similar entity whose mandate and key decisions, from licensing the logo to enforcing misuse, derive from the DAO’s on-chain resolutions. The proposal also sketches the need for clear rules on who can use the Aave brand for front ends, integrations and ecosystem products to reduce confusion and spoofing risks.
Decentralization, Legal Risk and Practical Questions
Supporters frame the move as a logical next step in protocol decentralization. The DAO already sets risk parameters, listings and incentive programs; extending that authority to brand stewardship, they say, keeps Aave’s public face aligned with its community-controlled core. It also reduces dependence on any one jurisdiction or corporate owner that might face regulatory pressure or internal strategic shifts.
Critics and cautious voices focus less on the principle and more on execution. Brand ownership interacts directly with off-chain law: infringement claims, contracts with partners, and potential liability all run through traditional courts. Governance participants therefore need a structure that lets the DAO direct policy without exposing token holders or individual contributors to unexpected legal responsibilities. Some community members also warn against turning brand decisions into routine governance noise, arguing for clear delegation frameworks and thresholds so the DAO intervenes only on major questions.
READ MORE: Solana Price May Crash to $100 Despite ETF Inflows and Strong Network Growth
