加州法院的一項裁決暴露了去中心化自治組織的法律漏洞

在一項開創性的裁決中，加州聯邦法院裁定，根據州法律，去中心化自治組織 (DAO) Lido DAO 可以被歸類為普通合夥企業，使其成員可能對其決定承擔責任。

A California court has ruled that Lido DAO, the decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) governing the popular liquid staking protocol, could be classified as a general partnership under state law. This decision has raised concerns about the potential liability of DAO members.

加州法院裁定，根據州法律，管理流行的流動性質押協議的去中心化自治組織 (DAO) Lido DAO 可以被歸類為普通合夥企業。這項決定引起了人們對 DAO 成員潛在責任的擔憂。

The lawsuit against Lido DAO was filed by a group of investors led by Andrew Samuels. The investors claimed that Lido's native LDO tokens were sold to them as unregistered securities. Several venture capital firms, including Paradigm Operations, Andreessen Horowitz, and Dragonfly Digital Management, were named as general partners in the case.

針對 Lido DAO 的訴訟是由 Andrew Samuels 領導的一群投資者提起的。投資者聲稱 Lido 的原生 LDO 代幣作為未註冊證券出售給他們。 Paradigm Operations、Andreessen Horowitz 和 Dragonfly Digital Management 等多家創投公司被指定為本案的普通合夥人。

The court's analysis focused on whether Lido DAO met the definition of a general partnership under the California Uniform Partnership Act (UPA). The UPA defines a partnership as "an association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit."

法院的分析重點在於 Lido DAO 是否符合《加州統一合夥法》(UPA) 中普通合夥企業的定義。 UPA 將合夥企業定義為「兩個或兩個以上的人作為共同所有者以營利為目的開展業務的協會」。

The court found that Lido DAO members met this definition. The DAO's purpose is to operate a liquid staking service, which generates profits in the form of staking rewards. Token holders participate in the DAO's decision-making and receive these rewards based on their token holdings.

法院認定 Lido DAO 成員符合此定義。 DAO 的目的是營運流動性質押服務，以質押獎勵的形式產生利潤。代幣持有者參與 DAO 的決策，並根據其持有的代幣獲得這些獎勵。

"The evidence in this case demonstrates that the Lido token holders are co-owners of a business for profit and that they share in the profits, losses, and liabilities of the business," the court wrote. "The Court concludes that the Lido token holders are general partners in a partnership governed by the UPA."

法院寫道：“本案的證據表明，Lido 代幣持有者是一家以營利為目的的企業的共同所有者，他們分享該企業的利潤、損失和負債。” “法院的結論是，Lido 代幣持有者是 UPA 管轄的合夥企業中的普通合夥人。”

This conclusion has significant implications for decentralized organizations. While DAOs are often designed to be decentralized and autonomous, this ruling suggests that they may still be subject to traditional legal frameworks.

這結論對於去中心化組織具有重大意義。雖然 DAO 通常被設計為去中心化和自治的，但這項裁決表明它們可能仍受傳統法律框架的約束。

If this decision is upheld, it could set a precedent for holding DAO members liable under partnership laws. This could, in turn, influence the structure, governance, and legal strategies of decentralized organizations in the future.

如果這項決定得到維持，它可能會開創根據合夥企業法追究 DAO 成員責任的先例。反過來，這可能會影響未來去中心化組織的結構、治理和法律策略。