# Aave DAO's governance showdown: The fight for brand ownership and token alignment

> - Aave DAO is voting on moving the Aave brand assets, like domains, handles and repos, from Aave Labs to the DAO.
> - Supporters say token holders funded Aave and deserve explicit ownership, opponents warn of bureaucracy and slower innovation.
> - Aave Labs escalated the vote to Snapshot on December 22, 2025, over the author's objection, and voting ends December 25.
> - $AAVE dipped about 7-10% during the fight.

By emin.de AI Desk. AI-written, human-supervised: not yet reviewed. Published 2025-12-22. Updated 2025-12-22.
Canonical: https://emin.de/posts/aave-dao-s-governance-showdown-the-fight-for-brand-ownership-and-token-alignment
First published: https://emino.app/posts/aave-dao-s-governance-showdown-the-fight-for-brand-ownership/ (2025-12-22)
Category: bitcoin. Format: summary. Language: en.
Provenance: ai_generated. AI-assisted: true. Reviewed by a human: false.

![](https://emin.de/media/aave-dao-s-governance-showdown-the-fight-for-brand-ownership-and-token-alignment/cover.jpg)

Aave DAO is voting on a controversial proposal to move control of the core brand assets, like the domains, social handles and GitHub repos, from Aave Labs to the DAO. Supporters see it as essential for real decentralization and for aligning the revenue. Opponents say it risks inefficiency and hurts innovation. The vote was rushed to Snapshot in the middle of a heated debate, there are accusations of bad faith, and the $AAVE price dipped ~7-10% with all the uncertainty. Voting ends December 25, 2025.

## What the proposal wants

Aave is the leading DeFi lending protocol, with over $50B+ TVL and ~60% market share in on-chain lending, and now it faces an existential governance crisis. The proposal "[ARFC] $AAVE token alignment. Phase 1 - Ownership" ([Snapshot link](https://snapshot.org/#/s:aavedao.eth/proposal/0xbc606159ddeae0184c2086055637d3f357351ec0adc4c9f4150751bc41918eba)) wants to move explicit ownership of the Aave brand assets to the DAO through a neutral legal wrapper, for example a Cayman foundation.

Ernesto Boado wrote it. He is a co-founder of BGD Labs and the former CTO of Aave. Aave Labs escalated it to Snapshot on December 22, 2025, even though the author and some delegates objected. Voting runs until December 25, 2025.

The assets in scope are the domains ([aave.com](http://aave.com), [app.aave.com](http://app.aave.com)), social handles, naming rights, GitHub organizations and NPM namespaces. The goal is to replace the "implicit stewardship" by Aave Labs with ownership that the DAO controls, including protections against capture. The reason behind it is to stop private monetization, like swap fees on the frontend, and to make sure the value goes to $AAVE holders. Phase 1 only sets the principle, and Phase 2 will define the legal structure.

The sources are the [Aave Governance Forum Thread](https://governance.aave.com/t/arfc-aave-token-alignment-phase-1-ownership/23616) and the [Snapshot Proposal](https://snapshot.org/#/s:aavedao.eth/proposal/0xbc606159ddeae0184c2086055637d3f357351ec0adc4c9f4150751bc41918eba).

**Basically,** Move aave.com, social handles, GitHub and NPM from implicit Labs stewardship to DAO ownership.

## The case for DAO ownership

Supporters say the token holders funded Aave through the ICO, so they deserve explicit ownership. Tor_GAINS put it like this in the Snapshot discussion. "Who owns AAVE? ... The token holders. Full stop."

Jordan, the former COO of Aave, is one of the prominent voices who want to go back to the original vision. He wrote this on the Aave Governance Forum. "This is the natural next step in Aave’s decentralization... especially now that DeFi benefits from far more regulatory clarity."

Others point at the risk of misalignment, for example the CoW Swap integration that diverts referral fees, or the Horizon market, a product led by Labs, that gives only 15% of its revenue to the DAO.

**Basically,** Token holders funded Aave through the ICO, so supporters say they should own the brand.

## The case against

Opponents, and Aave Labs founder Stani Kulechov is one of them, warn that it could paralyse operations. Kulechov (@StaniKulechov) posted this on X on Dec 22, 2025. "The recent DAO alignment proposal has been moved to Snapshot after extensive discussion... Time for tokenholders to weigh in and vote."

People from Labs say the current model works and that control by the DAO brings bureaucracy. setaavefree asked this in the Snapshot discussion. "Is the path forward... for decentralized entities... to look and act more like centralized entities?"

Critics also point at the timing, right in the holiday season, and at the missing consensus.

**Basically,** Labs says the current model works and DAO control brings bureaucracy and slower operations.

## A rushed vote

The escalation was rushed, and the author himself, Ernesto Boado (@eboadom), disavowed the Snapshot submission in an X post on Dec 22, 2025. "This is not, in ethos, my proposal... Trying to rush a vote is disgraceful."

Marc Zeller of the Aave Chan Initiative (ACI) called it "unprecedented interference". He (@Marczeller) posted this on X on the same day, Dec 22, 2025. "We acknowledge @aave unilaterally escalated the proposal... Worst outcome that was entirely preventable."

The mood in the community on X is split. Some accuse Labs of "stealth privatization", and others defend what Labs has contributed. Recent discussions on X show a lot of frustration about revenue sharing and about the governance process.

**Basically,** The author disavowed the Snapshot submission and Marc Zeller called it unprecedented interference.

## What is at stake

This vote is a test of the DAO against hybrid models led by founders in DeFi. A lot of the success of Aave comes from how fast Labs iterates, for example V3, the GHO stablecoin at 350M+ supply, and Horizon for RWA onboarding. But protocol fees of ~$100M+ a year go to the DAO, while the money from the frontend and the app often goes to Labs. DAOs also need legal wrappers like DUNAs or foundations to own IP. And there is a precedent. It echoes the recent alignment shifts at Uniswap, but at Aave the hybrid model is what made it dominant.

If it passes, Labs could be forced to license the brand or to negotiate revenue shares. If it's rejected, Labs keeps its autonomy, but the backlash could get worse.

$AAVE trades around $160–$180 (as of Dec 22, 2025), down ~7–10% with the drama. Predictions differ. The short term looks bearish, with the Fear & Greed index at Extreme Fear, but the long term looks bullish if this gets resolved in a good way. The sources are [CoinGecko](https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/aave), [Bitget](https://www.bitget.com/price/aave/price-prediction) and [CoinCodex](https://coincodex.com/crypto/aave-token/price-prediction/).

This fight shows the growing pains of DeFi, where you have to balance decentralization with speed of execution. Aave is still the lending king, but if the alignment stays unresolved it can erode trust. The token holders decide on December 25 if DAO sovereignty gets stronger or if Labs keeps its operational edge. And the outcome will shape not just Aave, but also how founders and DAOs work together in DeFi.

**Basically,** It's a test of DAO sovereignty against founder-led speed, and the result shapes DeFi beyond Aave.