Re:Court Ruling Could Affect the Future Direction of DAOs
by rvcdbn on Thursday April 06, 2023 @11:42AM
(#35469957)
By this line of reasoning wouldn’t Ethereum miners be liable too? (assuming this was all implemented on ethereum)
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Court Ruling Could Affect the Future Direction of DAOs
by houston_Euler on Thursday April 06, 2023 @12:17PM
(#35470563)
I believe miners wouldn't, because while they might technically coordinate their efforts in deciding which version of a cryptocurrency to mine, they aren't pooling their resources and representing themselves as a single entity.
That's partly what makes these individuals an unincorporated organization.
Re:Court Ruling Could Affect the Future Direction of DAOs
by rocqua on Thursday April 06, 2023 @01:00PM
(#35471203)
They don't cooperate for profit, they compete with eachother.
Everyone in a mining (or staking) pool seems more likely to count as a general partnership.
Re:Court Ruling Could Affect the Future Direction of DAOs
by latchkey on Thursday April 06, 2023 @02:40PM
(#35472558)
ETH no longer has miners since the switch to PoS. There are now stakers, validators, liquid staking tokens, block builders, ... it has gotten a lot more complex than it was before.
Re:Court Ruling Could Affect the Future Direction of DAOs
by olliej on Thursday April 06, 2023 @04:04PM
(#35473620)
What? Why would they be liable? The whole point is the liability in a partnership is shared between the partners: that is the entities that own the partnership.
Miners (staker?) aren't partners in the DAO: being a miner doesn't make you an owner of anything, anymore than being an employee or contractor to a partnership in the real world would make you liable for the actions of your employer/client.