gm Polkadot Community!

On behalf of Softlaw S.A. de C.V., I am reaching out to discuss a proposal with the community that we are preparing to support academia and legal literature within the Polkadot Ecosystem.

1. Antecedents

We have previously shipped an academic paper “_Legal Wrappers for decentralized Autonomous Organizations; A cross-jurisdictional Global Review for the Polkadot DAO”_, under the Polkadot.law proposal; delivered on time and within budget. The report is public on the forum. 

The research analyzes DAO regulation across multiple jurisdictions, including the United States, Europe, offshore jurisdictions, and the United Arab Emirates. The study concludes that Wyoming offers one of the most competitive legal frameworks for wrapping the Polkadot DAO through the Wyoming DUNA Act, primarily due to its technology-oriented and innovative regulatory approach. This framework helps protect DAO members from personal liability while preserving the essential technical characteristics of decentralized governance and on-chain operations, despite the statutory requirement of a minimum of 100 members.

Below we include the Comparative Matrix for DAOs’ Legal Wrappers summarizing the principal findings of our research. 

The previous DAO research, however, revealed a significant gap between policymaking processes and the actual functioning and development of DAOs. Accordingly, substantial efforts are still required to support the protection of Web3 values, as well as to further advance academic literature and research that facilitates a deeper understanding of the technical structures, governance mechanisms, and operational dynamics of decentralized technologies and DAOs for policymaking and regulatory purposes.

Moreover, the research must be continuously updated to reflect emerging legal and regulatory developments within the industry. Finally, the effective dissemination of such research is essential to ensure engagement with key stakeholders across the ecosystem, including policymakers, regulators, developers, investors, academics, and industry participants.

These activities will help to consolidate Polkadot as a reference for academic research, policy analysis and legal development of Web3 industries, as other Blockchains are currently undertaking. 

2. The Problem: Slow development of Blockchain regulation and the absence of Policy and legal Leadership by Polkadot.

As mentioned our latest research on DAO-related policies and regulatory frameworks across the globe, we encountered a very clear policy issue that undermines the development of blockchain technologies and Web3; a considerable slow adoption of suitable and innovative regulatory frameworks that adequately suits the unique technological features of DAOs, and other Web3 and blockchain applications. 

Despite the rapid growth of blockchain technologies, decentralized governance systems, and Web3 applications, the legal and regulatory development surrounding these technologies remains significantly slow and fragmented across the globe. Very few jurisdictions have adopted specific and appropriate legal frameworks capable of addressing the operational realities of decentralized systems such as Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), on-chain governance, or blockchain-native coordination mechanisms. Examples of such regulations are very limited including Wyoming DAO LLC and DUNA frameworks, the Marshall Islands DAO LLC regime, and more recently the UAE through RAK DAO initiatives. Most jurisdictions continue to rely on traditional corporate, financial, and administrative frameworks that were not designed to accommodate decentralized governance systems, including off-shore structures which limitations to suit blockchain technologies unique features have already resulted in considerable legal liabilities for their members.

One of the principal causes of this slow regulatory evolution is the persistent disconnect between technological innovation and public policy expertise. Policymakers, regulators, legal practitioners, and institutional actors often lack the interdisciplinary and technical understanding required to adequately assess blockchain governance systems, smart contract infrastructures, token-based coordination mechanisms, and decentralized organizational models. As a result, many regulatory approaches remain reactive, incomplete, or structurally incompatible with the decentralized architecture of Web3 technologies.

The gap extends beyond the lack of academic content and specialized literature; it also reflects a broader deficiency in diffusion, public engagement, and institutional outreach. Significant efforts must therefore be undertaken by the community to expand the understanding, adoption, and legitimacy of blockchain technologies and Web3 systems among policymakers, academic institutions, industry stakeholders, and the broader public.

The ultimate result of this is a slow and ineffective legal and regulatory approach to DAOs and Web3 applications, which undermines the development of such technologies and industries. 

Examples of this include:

i. The SEC's March 2026 release (33-11412) is piece of evidence that policymakers have been operating without adequate frameworks. It took the world's most sophisticated financial regulator 15+ years to produce its first comprehensive classification for crypto assets. Chairman Atkins himself acknowledged that the prior approach of "regulation by enforcement" was a failure -- and that failure was driven by insufficient understanding of the technology.

ii. The Polkadot DAO itself manages a treasury that has spent millions through on-chain governance, yet the legal status of OpenGov participants in most jurisdictions remains uncertain. Courts are treating DAO members as general partners with unlimited personal liability -- in the absence of better frameworks informed by better research.

iii. The two most famous model laws internationally for DAOs are COALA model law, and the DUNAA model law, but there are no guidelines or handbooks from international organizations on the use and regulation of DAOs and other Web3 technologies.  

On the other hand:

i. Wyoming's DUNA legislation (2024), the most advanced DAO-specific law in the United States, was developed with direct input from a small number of blockchain-literate lawyers. Most state legislatures have no equivalent expertise and no academic resources to draw from.

ii. At the same time, the blockchain ecosystem itself has historically prioritized engineering and technical development over institutional policy engagement, legal research, and social science analysis. While several blockchain ecosystems have invested heavily in technical infrastructure, developer tooling, and engineering research, significantly less attention has been dedicated to consolidating long-term institutional capacity for policy analysis, governance research, legal development, and regulatory engagement.

Within this context, Polkadot already stands as one of the most advanced ecosystems in blockchain governance and decentralized coordination. Through OpenGov, on-chain treasury governance, and its broader technical architecture, Polkadot has become a leading reference for decentralized technological innovation and governance experimentation. However, despite these technological advancements, there remains an important opportunity to consolidate Polkadot’s institutional presence within the fields of public policy, legal research, governance studies, and the social sciences.

The creation of the Polkadot Blockchain Policy and Legal Hub seeks to address this gap by positioning Polkadot not only as a technological leader, but also as a global reference in blockchain governance research, legal discussion, regulatory analysis, and policy development. The Hub would contribute to advancing interdisciplinary research, strengthening engagement with policymakers and academic institutions, and supporting the development of more informed, effective, and innovation-compatible regulatory approaches for blockchain and Web3 technologies worldwide.

Strengthening education, interdisciplinary research, public dialogue, and policy engagement is essential to fostering a more informed regulatory environment capable of supporting the sustainable development, innovation, and long-term growth of blockchain technologies and decentralized ecosystems.

The initiative aims to generate meaningful synergies between academia, researchers, legal practitioners, policymakers, regulators, and industry stakeholders. In doing so, the Hub seeks to bridge the existing knowledge gap between blockchain technologists, policymakers and legal practitioners responsible for shaping the regulatory and institutional environment surrounding emerging decentralized technologies, and accelerating the adoption of suitable regulatory frameworks for Blockchain and Web3 technologies. 

We now propose evolving a single research made by Polkadot.Law into a dynamic and world lead Polkadot Blockchain Policy and Legal Hub, that advance academic literature on blockchain and Web3 applications in order to accelerate the adoption of innovative and appropriate regulatory frameworks, embracing the Blockchain and Web3 industry. 

3. The Proposal: Polkadot.law as a Legal Research Academic Hub

We propose to transform Polkadot.law into a world-class center for legal, regulatory, and policy analysis focused on blockchain technologies, DAOs, and Web3.

The objective is to develop a literature data base accessible to Polkadot token-holders of academic papers reviewed and with feedback of lead scholars and experienced practitioners, as well as legal and regulatory updates of the most relevant issues for DAOs operations such as liabilities, anonymity, assets protections, and others while establishing a Hub that will be a reference point for policymakers, scholars, regulators, industry stakeholders, and international organizations seeking rigorous research, interdisciplinary analysis, and informed policy dialogue on the evolving governance and regulatory challenges of decentralized technologies, positioning Polkadot as a lead reference for policy and legal analysis in the blockchain industry while contributing to protect token-holders legal liabilities. 

The initiative aims to provide to token-holders of a dynamic, reliable and updated legal and policy repository informing them about relevant issues in the industry in order to contribute to their operations in the DAO by giving them academic legal certainty, while positioning Polkadot as a lead Academic Policy and Legal Hub for the blockchain industries.  

4. Core Activities. 

i) Research and Literature Production.

ii) Research Diffusion, Institutional Engagement and Policy Intakes

4.1. Research and Literature Production.

Development of a research agenda, covering the main issues of DAOs, Web3 and other blockchain technologies for policy and regulation, looking forward to addressing them by relevant scholars and legal practitioners. Some of these topics may include: 

a) Legal Personality of DAOs. This is a central issue for DAOs’ policy and regulation, as, depending upon it, important matters may be derived, including members’ liabilities, assets holding, and ability to sue and be sued.

b) Intellectual Property ownership in decentralized organizations, and its regulatory approach. (Including academic case study of treasury-funded marketing media.)

c) DAO Developers and Participants Protection (legal liabilities).

d) Privacy and anonymity for DAO members, particularly regarding their implications for anti-money laundering (AML) compliance and regulatory frameworks.

e) Treasury Proposals regulation:smart-contracts enforcement.

f) On-Chain Governance as Legal Decision-Making: Token Voting, the SEC's Digital Tools Framework, and the Boundaries of Corporate Action"

g) Cross-Border Enforcement of Smart Contract Agreements: Arbitration, Dispute Resolution, and the Recognition of On-Chain Adjudication.

h) Internationalization of DAOs operations, systems to solve conflict between DAOs, applicable law, and conflict of laws. 

i) Token-holders rights. 

j) Other topics suggested by the Polkadot token holders based on their concerns. 

The research agenda may be modified, further refined and expanded following consultations and feedback from leading scholars, universities, international organizations, think tanks, and industry stakeholders to ensure that it accurately reflects the most pressing and emerging challenges in blockchain and Web3 regulation, beyond the issues identified in our initial research.

Collaborations with academic institutions, research centers, and industry organizations will also be pursued to strengthen research input, facilitate recruitment and interdisciplinary discussion, and enhance the dissemination and impact of the project’s outputs.

The aim of this activity is to provide to Polkadot token-holders of an extended analysis and academic discussions of the most relevant legal and policy issues for DAOs operations, Web3 and blockchain technologies, already mentioned above, while contributing to developing academic literature in these issues for the legal sector and policymakers around the world, positioning Polkadot as a lead Academic centre in these sectors. 

4.2. Research Diffusion, Institutional Engagement and Policy Intakes.  

Under this section, we aim to strengthen the diffusion, visibility, and institutional outreach of the Hub’s research activities in order to consolidate Polkadot.law as a leading reference hub for legal, regulatory, and policy analysis within the blockchain and Web3 industry, particularly among academic institutions, policymakers, regulators, and the broader public sector, but also received feedback from lead scholars, legal practitioners and policymakers about the legal updates and academic content of the Hub. 

Publications. 

We aimed to pursue publications of the research generated by the HUB - including the already published paper on DAOs regulation - in leading academic journals and publications affiliated with internationally recognized institutions, such as the Harvard Law School and the University of Cambridge, with the objective of strengthening the academic reputation, visibility, and institutional credibility of Polkadot.law  

In addition to academic journals, we will also seek publication and collaboration opportunities with independent journals, industry magazines, policy platforms, and specialized conferences in order to position the Hub’s research and activities beyond academia and into broader industry, governmental, and policy-making circles. Examples of such conferences and journals include: European DAOs Workshop (DAWO), Blockchain & Fintech Conference at Harvard, Wyoming Blockchain Symposium, Prototypes for humanity, among others. 

**Note: publication in external academic journals is entirely dependent upon the editorial and publication committees of each institution. Leading journals associated with universities such as Harvard, Cambridge, and similar institutions are highly competitive and subject to rigorous peer-review and editorial standards. Accordingly, while we intend to submit multiple papers to a range of journals and academic publications, publication itself cannot be guaranteed. Furthermore, external journals may require modifications or adaptations to the research in order to comply with their respective editorial guidelines, formatting requirements, or publication criteria. **

Academic collaborations. 

We aimed to generate engagement with universities and academic institutions getting involved with student groups and scholars through law clinic projects, workshops, student journals and conferences in order to recruit researchers, increase the academic input and diffuse the HUB activities. 

Potential universities allies include: 

• University of Cambridge.- England. 
• University of California San Diego (UCSD). - United States of America.
• Lucy Cavendish College Cambridge. - England.
• Judge Business School - University of Cambridge. - England. 
• University of Oxford. - England.
• University College of London. - England. 
• Universidad de Guadalajara. (México). - México. 
• Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM).- México.
• Universidad Autónoma de Baja California.- México. 
• Hong Kong University. 
• Universidad Panamericana Campus Guadalajara.- México.

Institutional engagements and outreach. 

As the HUB will look to have an impact not only on academia but also influencing the industry and particularly the policy making and governmental sector, we look forward to advancing collaborations and engagement with governments, industry associations and international organizations in order to positionate the HUB as a lead centre for research, policy and legal analysis in the blockchain industry. 

The aim of this section will be the diffusion and positioning of the HUB activities within the agendas of such organizations, consolidating polkadot as a reference for policy and legal analysis of the blockchain industry. 

Potential allies include: 

• Entrepreneurship Institute of Baja California.- Mexico.
• Mexico’s Agency for Digitalization. 
• UK Parliament. - England. 
• Kings E-Lab Cambridge. - England. 
• Cambridge Blockchain Society.  - England. 
• Prototype for Humanity. UAE. 
• World Bank.- Global 
• United Nations Development Program (Blockchain Industries). Global. 
• ANADE. National Association of Corporate Lawyers in Mexico. - Mexico.

 

Policy intake.

Active involvement in the policy making process through consultations, opinions and conferences called by policymakers, industry stakeholders and other institutions in order to position the Hub as a lead reference for policy and legal analysis across the globe. 

Current relevant open or active policy/legal engagement channels in the blockchain, crypto, and DAO sector (May 2026):

i. SEC Release 33-11412 / 34-105020 — Application of Securities Laws to Crypto Assets. SEC Release 33-11412 Consultation PageU.S. Securities and Exchange Commission consultation regarding the treatment of crypto assets under federal securities laws, including token classification, staking, wrapped assets, mining, airdrops, and decentralization-related issues.Particularly relevant for DAO governance token analysis and securities perimeter discussions.

ii. SEC Crypto Task Force — Written Submissions and Stakeholder Engagement. SEC Crypto Task Force PortalThe SEC Crypto Task Force is actively receiving written input and engaging with academics, lawyers, industry actors, and policy experts on crypto regulation.

iii. SEC Crypto Task Force — Requests for Input on Crypto Trading Platforms and ATS Regulation. SEC Crypto Trading Platforms Input ProcessOngoing stakeholder engagement concerning crypto exchanges, Alternative Trading Systems (ATSs), DEXs, AMMs, and on-chain trading infrastructure.Highly relevant for research involving DAO-operated protocols, decentralized governance, and exchange regulation.

iv. UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) — CP26/13 Cryptoasset Perimeter Guidance. FCA CP26/13 ConsultationOpen consultation regarding the regulatory perimeter applicable to cryptoasset activities in the United Kingdom.

v. European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) — MiCA Implementation and Technical Guidance Process. ESMA MiCA HubAlthough not a formal “call for papers,” ESMA continues receiving technical engagement and market feedback during the implementation phase of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).

5. Team

Softlaw S.A. de C.V. is a Legaltech R&D Lab constantly challenging the limits of the law.

5.1. Research Team Members

6. Budget

We are requesting $100,000 USD for 12 months of operations, (July 2026 - June 2027)

6.1 Budget Breakdown

6.2 Budget Rationale

Phase 1 comparison: Phase 1 cost approximately $50,000 for a 114-page paper over 6 months. Phase 2 requests $100,000 for 12 months of continuous output: open source literature for Polkadot, institutional collaboration, legal monitoring centre, and a permanent reference resource at polkadot.law. 

Researcher rates: The lead researchers are compensated at rates below market for legal research of this scope. Comparable blockchain legal research (a16z's DAO Legal Framework, Paradigm's regulatory publications) is produced by teams with significantly larger budgets.

7. Public Good

Polkadot.law Academic Hub is a public good for the Polkadot and broader Web3 ecosystem, it provides legal theory and knowledge to bridge web3 values and technical realities into the policymaking field. 

7.1 Other benefits to Polkadot DAO Members.

The development of academic literature, regulation analysis, and discussions is useful to create legal awareness, take better collective desisions and prevent future issues, and also to serve as an academic input for current issues of the DAO that include: 

a) Decentralized Intellectual Property disputes: https://forum.polkadot.network/t/the-kus-public-review-ama-2022-2025/16341

b) Academic case study: https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/unpaid-by-a-decentralised-ecosystem/

8. Intellectual Property

All research papers, publications, compilations and other deliverables will be published under open licenses: CC BY 4.0

This ensures the research is a permanent public good for the Polkadot ecosystem, the broader blockchain community, and policymakers worldwide.

9. Contact

@wario_mx:matrix.org 

[email protected]