Genesis and legal nature of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations: personified purpose and algorithmic will

The relevance of this article lies in the existence of over 13,000 decentralized autonomous organizations worldwide, with a total capitalization exceeding 23 billion USD. Numerous projects exploit this form to circumvent regulatory frameworks. At both the international and Ukrainian levels, a coherent understanding of the phenomenon of decentralized autonomous organizations, their objectives, genesis, and legal nature remains absent. The purpose of this article is to explore the genesis and legal nature of decentralized autonomous organizations – from the inception of the technical idea to their transformation into sui generis legal entities. Applying comparative and formal legal methods to examine the development of the legal understanding of these organizations, and employing case study methodology to assess their implementation in practice, the article investigates the main stages of the formation of the modern concept of decentralized autonomous organizations, their differentiation from adjacent constructs – decentralized applications, autonomous agents, and decentralized organizations – by highlighting criteria of autonomy and decentralization, along with case studies from Bitcoin to The DAO. On the basis of a comparative legal analysis of regulatory models in the United States, Europe, and offshore jurisdictions, a conceptual mismatch is identified between classical corporate forms and the ontology of decentralized autonomous organizations. A two-component qualification test is proposed, alongside a typology dividing them into genuine, hybrid, and quasi forms. The findings of the study, together with the identification of practical challenges faced by such projects, substantiate the possibility of recognizing decentralized autonomous organizations as legal persons under Ukrainian law by means of the doctrinal construct of the “personalized purpose” (Zweckvermögen) developed by A. von Brinz, potentially implemented in the form of a foundation. This approach permits the integration of algorithmic will with legal personality without undermining their decentralized nature. The article provides a foundation for further inquiries into specific legal characteristics of decentralized autonomous organizations, including the “sorites paradox” and the prospects for legislative regulation within the Ukrainian legal order based on the doctrine of personalized purpose.