#CryptoRoundTableRemarks

As I was reading some articles and scrolling through some posts I got to see,so this is my take on the issue.

The debate over how to treat DeFi developers—whether as open-source builders or as financial intermediaries—raises important questions about accountability, innovation, and fairness. On one hand, many DeFi developers operate in the spirit of open-source software, creating tools that are freely available and permissionless. Like other open-source contributors, they often lack direct control over how their code is used. This perspective argues for protecting these developers to encourage innovation and avoid stifling technological progress with heavy-handed regulation.

However, the reality is more complex. Some DeFi protocols handle billions of dollars, and developers sometimes maintain governance rights or control over upgrades and fees. In such cases, the line between neutral coder and financial operator blurs. If a protocol has a clear governance structure, monetization strategy, or user interface that targets retail investors, then holding its builders to a higher standard of accountability—more like traditional financial intermediaries—may be justified to ensure consumer protection and financial stability.

As finance becomes increasingly code-driven, regulation must evolve in a way that’s nuanced and adaptive. A tiered framework could be appropriate—one that distinguishes between passive open-source contributions and active financial product development. Regulators should focus on functions and outcomes rather than labels, using risk-based approaches that assess control, intent, and impact. Striking this balance will be crucial to fostering both innovation and responsibility in the emerging world of decentralized finance.