Fantastic!

I'll reiterate my lawyer's-view request to think about other attributes of ownership that can be separated from an asset and dealt with independently in addition to forging rights. For example: the ability to separate and transfer voting rights in the event a voting system is implemented, the ability to give a third party a blocking right over your disposition of an asset, such that you can't transfer it without the third party's consent, or the ability to permit and control copies of digital assets (i.e. copyright principles).

Much of IP and real property law is taught and practiced by reference to the concept of a "bundle of rights," whereby ownership of an asset is actually an amalgamation of distinct rights in and to the asset, each of which can be separated and used independently in more sophisticated economic and contractual relationships. And the vast majority of pure contractual relationships in modern finance involve contracting parties agreeing to treat non-IP and real property assets similarly (securitizations and other structured finance transactions rely on a bewildering variety of fine-grained divisions of rights and obligations vis-a-vis financial assets).

Enabling even a small subset of these concepts at the protocol level (or in clever AT and/or multi-signature approaches) would likely open a floodgate of innovative reallocation of trust to the blockchain among real-world economic actors.