16 companies, 17 tickers. Companies are objecting to their shares being tokenized through the proposed OKXICE platform. But we’ve already seen this debate play out with AMC. AMC CEO Adam Aron recently went after Robinhood for offering tokens linked to AMC stock without the company’s consent, arguing that these synthetic products were effectively fake shares and questioning how the practice could be legal. Robinhood maintains that its tokens are debt securities providing price exposure, not actual ownership of the underlying shares. Should a company have the right to decide whether third parties can tokenize or create products linked to its stock? Or, if a product is legally structured and clearly communicates what the holder actually owns, should the issuer be able to prevent it from existing? There’s an important distinction between tokenizing actual shares with the associated ownership rights and creating a synthetic product that simply tracks a stock’s price. We need to educate people on these differences rather than treating every tokenized stock as the same thing. But at the same time, should companies have complete control over how financial exposure to their stock is created and traded? Tokenization could open up financial markets to more people, but who gets to control that access? What’s your opinion? Who should get to decide what can be tokenized? - the issuer, the platform, or the regulator?