I don't think that's why they play the token games. I think it's a combination of having no idea what to do that's actually value accretive, and/or knowingly issuing vapor with a symbol attached to it.
the SEC and CFTC openly disagree on what is/isn't a security (I've never heard of inter-agency disagreement like this before). coinbase, uniswap, opensea, all have the legal teams of god: wells notices. nobody knows what they're doing here.
I classify IP as just a legal ability to stop others from using an idea, not as an asset in and of itself. just like being really smart isn't an asset. but IP has no intrinsic value, and is just a way of not sharing ideas.
Some of the Byzantine logic is to avoid the Howey test given regulatory uncertainty.
Do you class IP as a claim on resources?
I don't think that's why they play the token games. I think it's a combination of having no idea what to do that's actually value accretive, and/or knowingly issuing vapor with a symbol attached to it.
the SEC and CFTC openly disagree on what is/isn't a security (I've never heard of inter-agency disagreement like this before). coinbase, uniswap, opensea, all have the legal teams of god: wells notices. nobody knows what they're doing here.
I classify IP as just a legal ability to stop others from using an idea, not as an asset in and of itself. just like being really smart isn't an asset. but IP has no intrinsic value, and is just a way of not sharing ideas.
In some cases, value accretive actions are obvious, though, and they still don't do them.
In the world of biotech, IP is king. No IP, no value. It's ownership of an idea, yes, but more than that-- an application that works.
I asked about IP because VitaDAO used tokens to fractionalize IP.