Aave's community is divided over whether the decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) or Aave Labs should control the protocol's brand and assets. The dispute highlights the broader tension in crypto between decentralized governance and centralized execution, particularly following Aave's integration of a tool that redirected fees to Labs instead of the DAO. Voting is ongoing, with a significant portion of the community opposing the shift to DAO control.

Aave Labs initiated a Snapshot vote on a proposal regarding brand asset ownership, sparking backlash from the community who accused the firm of sidestepping proper governance processes. Prominent delegates, including Marc Zeller, criticized the timing and lack of consensus, suggesting the proposal's advancement appeared rushed and lacked legitimacy.

An AAVE token holder has suggested a "poison pill" strategy for the DAO to take control of Aave Labs' intellectual property and revenue amid concerns over a recent integration that redirected funds away from the DAO. This proposal reflects ongoing tensions regarding governance and revenue distribution between the Aave community and Aave Labs.

This article discusses the conflict between Aave DAO and Aave Labs over revenue streams and brand usage. Aave Labs has redirected funds from the DAO to private operations, raising concerns about fiduciary duties and the potential dilution of the DAO's value. The debate highlights issues around protocol governance, product monetization, and communication gaps.

The content appears to be corrupted or unreadable, making it impossible to provide a coherent summary of the article's subject matter. It is likely that the intended text is missing or has not been properly formatted for display.