Regulatory Aspects of DAOs Panel Discussion at Vienna Blockchain Week 2025 

Decentralized autonomous organizations sit at the intersection of technology, law, and governance. The debate around regulatory frameworks is not about imposing new restrictions but about creating predictability. This perspective was examined in depth during a dedicated panel at Vienna Blockchain Week 2025. The discussion brought together practitioners, legal scholars, governance designers, and experts in international commercial law. Their shared question was how DAOs can be structured in a way that is functional, legally reliable, and sustainable, without constraining innovation.

Conceptual Foundations

The term DAO is often used loosely and therefore misunderstood. Three dimensions must be considered together: an automated technical system, a community of participants who make decisions, and an organizational structure that ensures those decisions take effect. Confusion arises when technical mechanisms are interpreted as legal constructs. Smart contracts do not replace legal contracts, and decentralization is not inherently valuable unless it improves governance outcomes. Clear conceptual differentiation is necessary to define accountability, rights, and liabilities.

Structure and Governance Design

The core of a DAO lies in how decisions are made. Roles, voting processes, delegation mechanisms, and execution responsibilities must be clearly defined and documented. Membership criteria, internal committees, and decision thresholds require transparency. Automated execution must rely on audited and secure smart contracts. Actions requiring human intervention must be supported by legal authority. Only when both onchain and offchain responsibilities are clearly connected can a DAO function as a coherent organization.

ADVERTISEMENT## Documentation and Disclosure

Transparency is a tool for building trust, not a symbolic gesture. Comprehensive documentation makes organizational structures comparable and reduces misunderstandings. Key information should include purpose, governance structure, decision making processes, budget allocation, operational responsibilities, and conflict resolution mechanisms. Clear disclosure enables potential participants to understand their rights, obligations, and potential risks. Lack of disclosure leads to misalignment and can facilitate misuse.

Legal Wrapper and External Representation

The legal wrapper is not the DAO itself but the interface through which it interacts with the external world. It may take the form of an association, foundation, cooperative, corporation, or another legal body. Its functions include contract capability, liability limitation, and lawful representation. The decisive factor is the alignment between the DAO’s internal governance and the formal powers of the legal entity. Without this alignment, legal uncertainty arises, particularly in liability and insolvency situations.

Liability, Insolvency, and Responsibility

If a DAO conducts economic activity without a defined legal form, individual members may be exposed to personal liability. When assets are managed collectively, the organization must be able to be dissolved or restructured if necessary. Courts may reclassify organizational structures if substance, representation, or accountability are unclear. A robust model distributes responsibility across defined roles and provides mechanisms for orderly continuation, restructuring, or dissolution.

ADVERTISEMENT## International Considerations

DAOs frequently operate across borders. This raises questions about applicable law, jurisdiction, dispute resolution, and recognition of decisions. To avoid uncertainty, the governing law and legal forum must be explicitly specified. The framework should be technologically neutral and adaptable so that organizations remain functional as technology evolves.

Development of Standards and Guidance

A globally binding regulatory regime would be premature. More constructive at this stage is the development of optional model documents, baseline disclosure standards, and recommended governance patterns. Observing real DAO governance in various jurisdictions will provide practical insights that can be refined into reusable guidance. Sustainable progress arises from iterative practice rather than top down rulemaking.

Conclusion

The regulatory future of DAOs lies not in creating a new category of special law but in applying clear organizational principles. Technology and governance must be coherently linked. Roles, responsibilities, and execution pathways must be transparent and enforceable. Through thoughtful use of legal wrappers, structured decision processes, and appropriate disclosure, DAOs can develop into organizational forms that are both innovative and trustworthy.

Related articles from Vienna Blockchain Week 2025:

Vienna Blockchain Week 2025: Bybit and Venionaire make big announcements in Vienna

Vienna Blockchain Week 2025: Where Innovation Meets Regulation in the Heart of Europe

ADVERTISEMENTTokenized Real World Assets on the Path to the Mainstream