Functional networks outgrow securities law. The Howey Test defines an investment contract based on a common enterprise with profit expectation from others' efforts. Modern L2s like Arbitrum and Optimism operate as public infrastructure where token value accrues from usage fees and network security, not corporate promotion.
the-sec-vs-crypto-legal-battles-analysis
Blog
Why Functional Networks Are Outgunning Securities Law
A first-principles breakdown of why protocols facilitating billions in independent, permissionless commerce—like Ethereum and Uniswap—represent a new class of utility infrastructure that renders 90-year-old securities frameworks functionally obsolete.
introduction
THE MISMATCH
Introduction: The Regulatory Anachronism
Blockchain networks have evolved into functional, decentralized utilities, rendering the 90-year-old Howey Test an obsolete framework for classification.
Token utility supersedes investment promise. A token like Ethereum's ETH is a consumable commodity for gas, not a share of the Ethereum Foundation. Similarly, Uniswap's UNI governs a protocol, with its value derived from DEX volume, not Uniswap Labs' profitability.
The SEC's rigid framework fails. Regulators treat all token distributions as securities offerings, ignoring the decentralized autonomous execution of protocols like MakerDAO and Compound. This creates legal uncertainty for developers building essential public goods.
key-trends
UTILITY AS A DEFENSE
The On-Chain Evidence: Networks That Work
Regulatory scrutiny targets securities; these networks are building defensible moats through demonstrable, high-utility functions that transcend speculative trading.
01
The Problem: The Stagnant Settlement Layer
Ethereum's base layer is secure but slow and expensive for high-frequency activity, pushing real utility to L2s and alt-L1s. This creates a regulatory bright line between the asset and its functional use-cases.
- Core Use-Case: Global, permissionless settlement with ~$50B+ in annualized fee revenue.
- Regulatory Shield: Its primary utility is as a decentralized computer, not a profit-sharing enterprise.
$50B+
Annual Fees
1.8M+
Daily Users
02
The Solution: Hyper-Specialized Execution Layers (Solana, Arbitrum)
These networks optimize for specific utility verticals—high-throughput DeFi and gaming—creating a clear consumptive use argument.
- Solana: Processes ~3k TPS with sub-second finality, enabling on-chain order books like Phoenix.
- Arbitrum: Dominates ~40% of all rollup TVL by becoming the de facto L2 for Ethereum DeFi apps.
3k TPS
Peak Throughput
40%
Rollup Dominance
03
The Problem: Opaque & Centralized Oracle Feeds
Smart contracts are blind. Traditional oracle designs (single-source) are points of failure and centralization, undermining the trustless value proposition of the apps they serve.
- Creates systemic risk for $20B+ in DeFi loans and derivatives.
- Centralized data sourcing is a legal liability and technical vulnerability.
$20B+
Secured Value
100+
Supported Chains
04
The Solution: Decentralized Data Networks (Chainlink, Pyth)
They function as critical middleware, not investment contracts. Their token is a work token for node operators securing the network.
- Chainlink: $9T+ in on-chain transaction value enabled via decentralized oracles.
- Pyth: Provides ~400 low-latency price feeds with data directly from TradFi institutions.
$9T+
Secured Value
400+
Price Feeds
05
The Problem: Fragmented Liquidity & User Experience
Assets siloed across dozens of chains kill composability and force users into complex, risky bridging. This stifles the network effect of a unified financial system.
- Results in $1B+ in bridge hack losses and poor capital efficiency.
- A pure infrastructure problem, not a speculative one.
$1B+
Bridge Exploits
50+
Active Chains
06
The Solution: Intent-Based Protocols (UniswapX, Across)
These are utility networks that solve routing and settlement, abstracting chain complexity from the user. Tokens facilitate coordination, not profit-sharing.
- UniswapX: Aggregates liquidity across AMMs and private market makers via off-chain auctions.
- Across: Uses a single-sided liquidity model and optimistic verification for fast, cheap cross-chain swaps.
~2s
Swap Latency
-20%
Avg. Price Impact
HOWEY TEST DECONSTRUCTED
The Utility vs. Security Spectrum: A Protocol Matrix
A functional analysis of blockchain protocols against the SEC's Howey Test criteria, demonstrating why operational utility networks are diverging from the securities classification.
| Howey Test Prong / Functional Metric | Traditional Security (e.g., Corporate Stock) | Pure Utility Network (e.g., Ethereum, Filecoin) | Hybrid 'Work Token' (e.g., early Helium, Livepeer) |
|---|---|---|---|
Profit Expectation from Efforts of Others | Conditional (Early Stage) | ||
Native Asset Required for Core Protocol Function | |||
Token Burn/Destroy Mechanism for Service Access | ~3M ETH/yr (EIP-1559) | Variable by design | |
Post-Launch Decentralization of Development | < 1 entity |
| 1-5 entities initially |
On-Chain Revenue Distributed to Holders | Dividends | Validator/Staker Rewards (4.2% ETH staking APR) | Operator Rewards |
Primary Use Case | Capital Appreciation / Dividends | Gas Fee Payment & Staking Collateral | Network Access & Work Right |
Regulatory Precedent (U.S.) | SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. | SEC closes investigation on Ethereum 2.0 (2023) | Ongoing (SEC v. Ripple re: XRP) |
deep-dive
THE MISMATCH
Deconstructing the Howey Test for a Decentralized World
The SEC's Howey Test fails to evaluate functional utility networks, creating a legal vacuum for decentralized protocols.
The Howey Test is obsolete for evaluating decentralized networks. It was designed for passive investment contracts, not for assessing the functional utility of a global, permissionless state machine like Ethereum or Solana.
Token value decouples from development efforts. In a mature network like Lido or Uniswap, the token's price is driven by protocol utility and fee capture, not the managerial efforts of a central team, invalidating a core Howey prong.
The SEC's 'investment contract' framework collapses when applied to a sufficiently decentralized network. The legal precedent from the Ripple case established that secondary market sales of a token are not securities transactions.
Evidence: The market cap of tokens like UNI and AAVE, which explicitly forgo fee accrual to avoid securities claims, demonstrates that value accrual is a network effect, not a profit promise from a common enterprise.
counter-argument
THE JURISDICTIONAL MISMATCH
Steelmanning the SEC: Then Refuting It
The SEC's securities framework is structurally incompatible with decentralized, functional networks that operate as global utilities.
The SEC's strongest argument is that most token sales are investment contracts under the Howey Test. Investors provide capital to a common enterprise with an expectation of profit from the efforts of others. This logic fits early-stage ICOs and centralized entities like Ripple Labs, where a single company's actions directly drive token value.
The refutation is technological. A mature functional network like Ethereum or Arbitrum is not a common enterprise. Its value accrual is now driven by global, permissionless usage—DeFi on Uniswap, NFTs on OpenSea, and rollup settlement—not the managerial efforts of a core team. The network is a utility, not a security.
The legal precedent is outdated. The Howey Test analyzes a 1940s Florida orange grove, not a decentralized autonomous network. Applying it to a protocol like Lido or Aave, where governance is tokenized and execution is automated, is a category error. The 'efforts of others' criterion dissolves.
Evidence: The Ethereum Merge demonstrated this shift. Post-transition, ETH's value is tied to its function as gas for global computation and collateral in DeFi, not the Ethereum Foundation's development roadmap. The SEC's case against Coinbase staking targets a centralized wrapper, not the underlying decentralized protocol.
protocol-spotlight
BEYOND THE HOWEY TEST
Case Studies in Functional Utility
Protocols delivering tangible, non-speculative services are creating a new legal and economic paradigm.
01
The Filecoin Storage Market
The Problem: Centralized cloud storage is a $100B+ market dominated by AWS and Google, creating single points of failure and censorship. The Solution: A decentralized, verifiable marketplace where users pay FIL tokens for provable, long-term data storage. The token is a medium of exchange for a real-world service, not a passive investment.
- Utility: Pay-as-you-go storage contracts with ~$0.0016/GB/month pricing.
- Legal Shield: SEC closed its investigation, citing the network's operational and functional nature.
20+ EiB
Storage Capacity
~$0.0016/GB
Avg. Cost
02
Helium's Decentralized Wireless
The Problem: Building physical telecom infrastructure (5G, LoRaWAN) is capital-intensive and slow, leaving coverage gaps. The Solution: A token-incentivized network where individuals deploy hotspots to provide wireless coverage, earning HNT for verifiable data transfer. The token is earned through work and burned for data credits.
- Utility: ~1M hotspots globally provide IoT and cellular coverage.
- Legal Precedent: Settled with SEC for $0 penalty, with a path for functional tokens to transition away from securities classification.
1M+
Hotspots
200K+
5G Cells
03
Livepeer's Video Transcoding
The Problem: Centralized video transcoding (Twitch, YouTube) is expensive and opaque, costing streamers ~$0.03 per streaming hour. The Solution: A decentralized marketplace where GPU operators compete to transcode video, paid in LPT. Users stake LPT to coordinate the network and earn fees for work performed.
- Utility: ~50-80% cheaper transcoding costs versus AWS MediaConvert.
- Functional Core: LPT is staked to perform work (orchestrating video jobs) and earn fees from a real service, decoupling its value from pure speculation.
-80%
vs. AWS Cost
10M+
Weekly Minutes
04
The Graph's Query Infrastructure
The Problem: DApps need efficient access to blockchain data, but running full nodes and crafting complex queries is slow and expensive. The Solution: A decentralized indexing protocol where Indexers stake GRT to provide query services, earning fees. Curators signal on valuable data. The token is a work token for a critical web3 data layer.
- Utility: Serves ~1 Trillion+ queries monthly for protocols like Uniswap and Aave.
- Work-Based Model: GRT is staked to perform the service of indexing and querying; slashing occurs for poor performance, aligning with utility, not investment.
1T+
Monthly Queries
800+
Subgraphs
takeaways
FUNCTIONAL NETWORKS VS. SECURITIES LAW
TL;DR for the Time-Poor Architect
Functional networks are redefining the regulatory perimeter by prioritizing utility over capital formation, creating a new legal paradigm.
01
The Howey Test Fails on Active Use
The SEC's framework collapses when token value is derived from protocol utility, not passive appreciation. Functional networks like Ethereum and Solana pass the major questions doctrine by being decentralized computing platforms.\n- Key Benefit: Legal precedent for networks with >1M daily active users.\n- Key Benefit: Clear distinction from ICO-era projects with zero utility.
>1M
Active Users
0
Profit Promises
02
The Consumption-Driven Valuation Model
Value accrual is tied to resource consumption (gas, storage, compute), not speculative trading. This mirrors utility billing, not equity. Networks like Filecoin (storage) and Helium (connectivity) are physical world operators.\n- Key Benefit: Revenue metrics ($ fees burned) trump P/E ratios.\n- Key Benefit: Aligns with global telecom/utility regulatory models.
$ Fees
Burned
PWR
Commodity
03
Decentralization as a Legal Firewall
Sufficient decentralization removes the common enterprise required for a security. Uniswap's UNI and Maker's MKR are precedents where governance tokens escaped enforcement because control is diffuse.\n- Key Benefit: No single party controls core protocol development or operations.\n- Key Benefit: Creates a regulatory moat for mature L1s and DeFi bluechips.
1000s
Node Ops
On-Chain
Governance
04
The Protocol-as-a-Service (PaaS) Escape Hatch
Framing the network as an open, permissionless service reframes the token as an access credential, not an investment. This is the core argument for Lido's staking service and Aave's lending pool.\n- Key Benefit: Users pay for a service, they don't invest in a company.\n- Key Benefit: Direct analogy to AWS credits or API keys, which are not securities.
Access
Credential
$30B+
TVL Services
05
The Intent-Based Architecture Loophole
Networks that merely fulfill user-specified intents (e.g., bridges like Across, aggregators like CowSwap) act as passive infrastructure. The token facilitates routing and security, not profit-sharing.\n- Key Benefit: Protocol is a message router, not an active manager.\n- Key Benefit: Aligns with common carrier legal protections.
User
Specified Intent
Passive
Execution
06
Global Regulatory Arbitrage is Inevitable
The EU's MiCA explicitly carves out utility tokens, while the US remains ambiguous. Functional networks will domicile and scale in clear jurisdictions, forcing the SEC's hand. This is the GitHub vs. Microsoft dynamic for open-source infra.\n- Key Benefit: Legal clarity in EU/UK/APAC attracts core dev teams.\n- Key Benefit: Creates competitive pressure for pragmatic US regulation.
MiCA
EU Clarity
Dev Talent
Migration
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall