3 ms·
I didn't meant the DAO to be an actor outside the legal system. The difficulty of answering your remark is that different legal systems probably have different
by neiman 7y ago
I didn't meant the DAO to be an actor outside the legal system.
The difficulty of answering your remark is that different legal systems probably have different point of views about it.
According to what I was told where I live, I'm allowed to organize activities, even such involved payments, with other people without registering an organization. Especially if those other people come from different countries. As long as I'm declaring my full income and pay taxes.
Such a thing limits what a DAO can do - for example, it can't sign agreements with regular companies (it's not a legal entity) or it cannot employ people.
But as long as you don't do such things, I was told it is allowed. I'm being careful with such statements since I'm not a lawyer.
You may see DAOs as a legal alternative for civil agreements, which are really difficult to make for individuals in the international market.
- reificator 7y ago> Such a thing limits what a DAO can do - for example, it can't sign agreements with regular companies (it's not a legal entity) or it cannot employ people. The article starts by saying that they want to demonstrate that Mozilla is not the sole entity behind rust. After that, the very first reason they give for wanting to start a foundation is to sign contracts. > Lately, though, the Rust project has started to hit the limits of what Mozilla can reasonably support. One common example that arises is the need to have some entity that can legally sign contracts “for the Rust project”. For example, we wished recently to sign up for Github’s Token Scanning program, but we weren’t able to figure out who ought to sign the contract.