AAVE News: Aave community splits over control of protocol’s brand assets

‘Most important tokenholder rights debate’: Aave faces identity crisis The Aave community has become sharply divided over control of the protocol’s brand and related assets, intensifying an ongoing dispute over the relationship between the DAO and Aave Labs. What to know: Aave's community members and participants have become sharply divided in a debate over control of the protocol’s brand and related assets, intensifying an ongoing dispute over the relationship between the DAO and Aave Labs. The debate has drawn outsized attention because it cuts to a central question facing many of crypto’s largest protocols: the tension between decentralized governance and the centralized teams that often drive execution. Aave's community members and participants have become sharply divided in recent weeks over control of the protocol’s brand and related assets, intensifying an ongoing dispute over the relationship between the decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) and Aave Labs, the centralized developer firm that builds much of Aave’s technology. The debate has drawn outsized attention because it cuts to a central question facing many of crypto’s largest protocols: the tension between decentralized governance and the centralized teams that often drive execution. As protocols scale and brands accrue value, questions around who ultimately controls those assets, token holders or builders, are becoming harder to ignore. The dispute was triggered by Aave’s integration of CoW Swap , a trade execution tool, which resulted in swap fees flowing to Aave Labs rather than the DAO treasury. While Labs argued the revenue reflected interface-level development work, critics said the arrangement exposed a deeper issue: who ultimately controls the Aave brand, which has over $33 billion in locked into its network. That question has now become central to the debate over ownership of Aave’s trademarks, domains, social accounts and other branded assets. Supporters of DAO control argue the proposal would align governance rights with those who bear economic risk, limit unilateral control by a private company, and ensure the Aave brand reflects a protocol governed and funded by token holders rather than a single builder. Those who support the Lab having that position counter that taking brand control away from the builders could slow development, complicate partnerships and blur accountability for running and promoting the protocol. The proposal has deeply divided community members, with opponents and supporters offering starkly different visions for the future of Aave. Labs support Supporters of Aave Labs argue that the company’s continued control over Aave’s brand and related assets is critical to the protocol’s ability to execute and compete at scale. They say Aave’s rise to prominence in DeFi is inseparable from Labs’ operational autonomy. “Something that deserves more weight in these discussions is how much of Aave’s success over the years is due to Aave Labs/Avara, and how challenging it is to run an actual company as a DAO,” said Nader Dabit on X , a former Aave Labs employee. “DAOs are structurally incapable of shipping competitive software. Every product decision becomes a governance proposal, every pivot requires token holder consensus, and every fast-moving...

Preview: ~500 words