I happen to be an attorney, also happen to have organized the first Delaware LLC that memorialized smart contracts into the Certificate of Organization (the “Ar

I happen to be an attorney, also happen to have organized the first Delaware LLC that memorialized smart contracts into the Certificate of Organization (the “Articles”) pursuant to the DE Limited Liability Company Act amendment authorizing LLC records to be kept on blockchains, I’ve also worked with the SEC on a No Action Letter Request for a public offering of tokens, so I have a little insight. Again I’m in agreement there is always potential liability and risk, and notwithstanding their activities I think we can both safely and fairly assume AZ16 has at least competent legal representation that advises them nearly every step of the way and minimizes any legal risk and potential liabilities. Beyond that, without specific examples I just wouldn’t speculate, but as a simple example going back to the idea of DAO without a legal entity being treated as a General Partnership resulting in joint and several liability, yes that could be very bad for you and me if we invested in tokens in our individual capacities because we could have unlimited personally liable, but I’d be shocked if AZ16 didn’t use separate legal entities as investment vehicles for each DAO investment, meaning under the same set of facts their liability though unlimited like you and I personally, would in practice be limited to their investment via the separate investing vehicle. In terms of not mentioning securities in that publication, no I’m not surprised. Not because it isn’t a very important issue, but securities issues and analysis is independent of the legal framework being discussed, which they are defining as the legal entity, tax and operational considerations. They might have other publications with respect to securities, but if I were their lawyer, I’d advise against it.