Concerns Regarding Proposal Transparency and Potential Conflicts of Interest
It is imperative to address several transparency concerns and potential conflicts of interest associated with this proposal.
Oku, a project operated by GFX Labs, generates revenue primarily through deployment and ongoing maintenance fees for entities seeking to integrate Uniswap v3. Oku positions itself as an expert in v3 code implementation and appears to derive the vast majority—if not the entirety—of its revenue from this model. This subscription-based structure has demonstrated significant value to Oku itself, while providing limited to no direct benefit to UNI token holders. This mirrors the value capture model historically observed with Uniswap Labs.
The proposed exclusive license exemption of Uniswap v4 for similar purposes would represent a substantial commercial advantage for Oku and GFX Labs. If this integration is indeed as valuable as it is positioned to be, then a compelling question arises: Why is the DAO being asked to fund this effort or subsidize it through grants or paying subscriptions and deployment costs, when the commercial value accrues disproportionately to Oku and GFX Labs?
Further, serious reputational concerns have been raised. Rune Christensen, a founder of MakerDAO and Sky, has publicly accused the GFX Labs delegation of participating in a coordinated governance attack on MKR token holders, allegedly with the objective of acquiring governance control through the forced liquidation of MKR holdings. Rune referred to the actors involved as “a crooked mercenary VC fund” with a track record of extracting value from DeFi protocols without equitable contribution.
In light of these allegations, several critical questions remain unanswered:
-
Who are the venture capital firms currently backing GFX Labs and Oku?
-
Is Phoenix Labs among those investors?
-
What is the source of the funding that has supported Oku beyond the $1.6 million grant provided by the Uniswap DAO?
-
Is there any ongoing or pending litigation involving GFX Labs, Oku, and MakerDAO or Sky?
Additionally, Oku’s intent to commercialize an “enterprise” version of its Uniswap v4 API, while keeping the free version closed-source, suggests further value extraction for private benefit at the expense of broader DAO alignment and open-source principles. @jengajojo
A further concern is an apparent violation of the Uniswap DAO’s stated governance principles. Specifically, the Uniswap Foundation’s published guidelines require that all conflicts of interest be disclosed and that delegates with such conflicts abstain from voting on related proposals. GFX Labs, despite having a direct financial interest in this proposal, has already voted in favor of its own Snapshot proposal. This action appears to be a clear breach of the DAO’s governance principles.
Given the above, I strongly urge all delegates to exercise heightened caution and critical judgment before casting votes in support of this proposal.