The Lab / Research topic
Ownership reviews ask what is actually held, who can control it, and which rights are documented separately. A domain registration, a token balance, a media license, and a claim on an underlying asset are different things to inspect. The terminology alone cannot settle the review.
Map the asset to its identifier, controlling account, relevant permissions, and transfer conditions. Where a claim depends on a third party, keep that dependency in the record. These guides show how to separate technical possession from the broader package of rights or benefits a buyer expects, and how to keep unresolved questions visible.
4 guides about ownership
An NFT can connect a token, a media reference, and a promised experience without making them the same asset. Use a structured rights and dependency review to establish what is documented, controllable, transferable, and still uncertain.
Read the guide: NFT and Web3 Due Diligence: What the Token Actually Gives YouA real-world asset token needs a documented connection to something beyond its ledger entry. Follow the claim from token to underlying asset, identify the responsible parties, and test how reconciliation, payments, redemption, and exceptions are supposed to work.
Read the guide: RWA Token Screening: Connect the Token to the Underlying ClaimA token's name and price chart reveal little about its controls. Build a Solana screening record that connects the correct mint to supply permissions, concentration, liquidity, and the evidence needed to resolve uncertain findings.
Read the guide: Solana Token Screening: Mint Authorities, Supply, and LiquidityA memorable domain still needs a practical acquisition review. This checklist separates control, transfer mechanics, recurring costs, brand questions, and historical use so a buyer can identify unresolved conditions before discussing final terms.
Read the guide: Domain Name Due Diligence: A Buyer’s Screening ChecklistQuestions worth asking
Explore a new asset class or suggest a topic for the Lab.
