Cena UNIUNI

Another Aave DAO participant is questioning whether the relationship between the Aave protocol and its two main overseers, its governing decentralized autonomous organization, and the for-profit company Aave Labs, which is primarily responsible for Aave’s development, needs to be reevaluated. In a recent governance forum post, a user by the name of tulipking proposed that Aave DAO take control over Aave Labs’ intellectual property — including its published code and brand trademarks — as well as corporate equity by filing a “poison pill” lawsuit. The move is meant to supplant control over the highly successful decentralized lending protocol and solidify ownership by all AAVE token holders. This “declaration of sovereignty” represents an escalation in an ongoing conversation between Aave community members over how to allocate protocol revenue and which organization ultimately controls Aave. Aave is by far the largest decentralized lending protocoland one of the most profitable DeFi protocols. Last week, a token holder raised questions about a recent CoW Swap integration that seemed to have diverted revenue away from the Aave DAO and toward Aave Labs, sparking a debate among key protocol stakeholders, including Aave Labs CEO Stani Kulechov and Aave Chan Initiative founder Marc Zeller, perhaps the two most visible representatives for Aave as a whole. “This is a defensive ‘poison pill’ to protect the DAO from centralized capture and ensure that all value flows back to AAVE holders,” tulipking wrote in their proposal. “By monetizing the Aave brand, front‑end, and user base without DAO approval, Aave Labs has effectively privatized what should be a community‑owned asset.” Tulipking’s post on the Orbit governance forum seems to echo Zeller’s concerns over the “stealth privatization” of Aave by Aave Labs after the company made the “unilateral decision” to roll out CoW Swap-powered swap functionality that has redirected hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of ETH in front‑end swap fees to a privately held address. A previous front-end integration with Paraswap sent surplus and referral fees to the Aave DAO treasury. “This proposal is a direct response: if the Labs will not voluntarily share revenue and control, then the DAO must take back everything,” tulipking wrote. In addition to taking total control of Aave’s IP, tulipking proposed reclaiming “all past revenue generated by Aave Labs from Aave‑branded products” and commandeering the company’s equity, essentially “converting Aave Labs into a wholly owned subsidiary of the DAO.” Zeller, who has been an active part of the ongoing conversation sparked by the CoW Swap integration, called tulipking’s post “the most important proposal in the history of the Aave governance,” noting it will have a “long-lasting impact on the DAO model and how tokens should be valued.” In a long forum post, Zeller noted that it remains unclear “who owns the Aave trademark” and “who is entitled to benefit from the Aave IP and Aave brand?” He argued that ACI, an advocacy group for the Aave DAO, has “contributed heavily” to Aave’s operations and that there was a “tacit” understanding that the DAO "lent the usage of the Aave brand and IP in exchange for the monetization of the aave.com frontend.” Token problems Indeed, last week’s post by Orbit Delegate EzR3aL sparked a wider conversation about the conflicts between token rights and corporate equity, including whether there is a fiduciary duty not to harm token holders. This is a longstanding problem in blockchain governance experiments, most recently brought into the spotlight by Circle’s acquisition of the Axelar team, but not the token. Uniswap Labs, the developer of another “blue chip” DeFi project, recently took steps to absorb the non-profit Uniswap Foundation while rewarding token holders by sharing a portion of protocol fees and turning on a token burning mechanism under the “UNIfication” proposal that’s still under consideration. For his part, Kulechov noted that the CoW Swap integration diverted a former revenue stream for the DAO, but said this was a “voluntary donation,” not an entitlement. He also argued the switch improved user experience through better price execution and MEV protection, and that Aave Labs has a duty to monetize its frontend. That said, Kulechov agreed with feedback suggesting the integration “should have been brought up for discussion” and been more transparent. The recent debate comes on the heels of other governance conversations, including Zeller’s proposal in October to formalize a $50 million annual AAVE token buyback mechanism and a major reshaping of Aave’s tokenomics earlier this year. The Aave Chan Initiative has also recently proposed culling unprofitable Aave deployments on less-populated chains. Aave is arguably the best example of functioning token governance. EzR3aL, the pseudonymous tokenholder who kicked off the debate, responded to tulipking’s post with a reminder that, according to official procedure, the proposal to commandeer Aave Labs should have started with a temp check. “Please see the pinned post or look at other temp checks. Gonna close the thread till you edit it,” they said. Disclaimer: The Block is an independent media outlet that delivers news, research, and data. As of November 2023, Foresight Ventures is a majority investor of The Block. Foresight Ventures invests in other companies in the crypto space. Crypto exchange Bitget is an anchor LP for Foresight Ventures. The Block continues to operate independently to deliver objective, impactful, and timely information about the crypto industry. Here are our current financial disclosures. © 2025 The Block. All Rights Reserved. This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

BlockBeats News, December 16, the Uniswap fork protocol Stable Swap deployed by blockchain development service provider Protofire has been integrated into Stable, bringing Uniswap V2 and V3 version functionality to Stable.

UNI Price Prediction: $6.75 Target by Year-End with Potential Rally to $13 in Q1 2026 UNI price prediction suggests a move to $6.75 resistance by December 31st, with medium-term Uniswap forecast targeting $13 if key technical breakouts materialize in early 2026.

On the day of the UNI burning proposal, a whale went long, currently facing a floating loss of approximately 580%.

⚡️ NEW: Vitalik Buterin recently sold small amounts of $UNI, $KNC, and $DINU, receiving about 16,800 $USDC in total.