📼Token Lockups

This section covers smart contracts related to Investor Lockups and Treasury Lockups

Overview:

The Token Lockups Contracts allow on-chain teams to distribute tokens to their investors, advisors, and community with a time based unlock schedule, where tokens cannot be revoked or cancelled, but unlock over a preset immutable schedule. This tool is designed for distributing tokens to beneficiaries who are guaranteed the rights to the tokens, but with a predefined time based unlock schedule. The tool allows for the lockups to be transferable or not transferable, which is required to be defined when creating the token lockups initially. Transferable lockups allow beneficiaries to transfer the lockups to a custodian, cold storage, and potentially used in DeFi protocols such as lending / swapping, opening up a larger ecosystem and use case for the token lockups.

The contract has two primary users, the creator and the beneficiary. Once the creator has created the token lockup plan and issued it to the beneficiary, they are no longer involved and have no administration rights over the lockup plan. All of the lockup details are set and immutable at creation. The contract controls the rate at which tokens unlock to the beneficiary, but also allows the beneficiary to participate in governance via delegation, transfer the lockup plans, and even split a single lockup plan into multiple chunks - or recombine previously split chunks back into a single lockup plan. At its core the lockup plan contract acts as an escrow contract, holding the tokens that unlock and are available to be claimed by the beneficiary based on the unlocking rates set at inception. The escrow contract is built on top of the ERC721 standard, with additional features, whereby the beneficiary has an NFT issued to their wallet address that is the owner of the lockup plan. There are 4 versions of the lockup plans, 1. Transferable with on-chain governance enabled contract 2. Transferable without on-chain governance enabled (but optimized for snaphshot voting) 3. Non-transferable with on-chain governance enabled 4. Non-transferable without on-chain governance enabled Each contract type has a different use case, performing the job that is required for its users. For instance tokens with on-chain voting that are locked for investors would likely use the version 1, so that investors can transfer them to custodians or cold storage, or even sell on secondary markets and participate in governance. Whereas a DAO locking up their treasury tokens to transparently evidence the emissions schedule to the community would likely use version 4 - where the lockup is not transferable and cannot participate in governance.

Because the lockup plans are built without oracles and an NFT primative, additional use cases can be built on top, such as intermediate ownership of a splitter contract for pooled investments, or an intermediate DAO contract that anyone can execute a claim of the tokens to.