One of the most concerning things is the Darkcoin community isn't screaming bloody murder about how the Dashcoin deal went down. You're all forever talking about how you'd have to buy such an enormous amount of masternodes to compromise the network. Yet what Evan has done is set precedent saying it is ok to take over a coin by buying out the dev and taking over the repo. This creates a MASSIVE centralization issue for Darkcoin. What you are all saying is it is ok for a company or government entity to approach Evan (or his eventual successor) with big $$$, buy him out, take over github, and then they have all legal rights to the coin. They don't have to spend a penny on the open market buying up coins, they don't have to find a vulnerability in the code, they don't have to buy 4000 masternodes. They just have to find the main developer's price.
And make no mistake, EVERYONE has a price.
Scary.
If you guys don't understand this then it's just pure ignorance. I have no idea which way an actual legal battle will go but the fact you think you can take over a coin by just buying out the dev and all will be okay is mind boggling.
Again, not sure where all this misconception of "taking over coins" is coming from but Evan approached the lead dev about buying the name, something that the lead dev could have (if they so desired) trademarked but didn't. Evan is essentially trademarking what the original dev could have at the start of the project. For all intensive purposes, the codebase is out there to continue development should you want. By obtaining the rights (and the start date of Dashcoin's project) there is viability to contesting the trademark of a later date. The coin was on the brink of being dead as is and the only reason this is stirring so much ground is because people want want want want want. Quite frankly, no one knows the exact terms on either side... it's all speculation.