---
type: claim
domain: internet-finance
description: "Git3 proposes Code as an Asset (CAA) framework where repositories become tradeable NFTs with x402 payment rails, but faces unproven demand for paid code access and unclear agent willingness to pay"
confidence: speculative
source: "Git3 project description, futard.io launch 2026-01-01"
created: 2026-03-11
---

# Code as Asset class targets $500B+ developer economy through repository NFTs and x402 monetization

Git3 proposes Code as an Asset (CAA) as a new asset class targeting the $500B+ global developer economy. The framework treats Git repositories as unique on-chain NFTs with multiple revenue streams:

**Creator fees:** Repositories minted as NFTs generate fees on primary and secondary sales (similar to ENS for .eth domains)

**Protocol fees:** Small fees on transactions executed through x402 agents

**Agent royalties:** Micro-fees distributed to developers when AI agents execute or verify their code

**Access pricing:** Developers can set clone or access prices for repositories

**Economic thesis:** Code hosting remains centralized and largely unmonetized despite the scale of the developer economy. Git3 claims blockchain infrastructure can unlock monetization by establishing verifiable ownership through NFTs, creating payment rails through x402 protocol, enabling AI agent interoperability through decentralized Model Context Protocol, and providing permanent, censorship-resistant storage on Irys blockchain.

**Phase 3 roadmap (Q4 2025)** targets launch of $GIT3 token for governance, marketplace transactions, and protocol incentives, plus enterprise features and partnerships.

**Why this is speculative rather than experimental:**

1. **No proven demand for paid code repository access at scale** — GitHub's zero-price model dominates because network effects and switching costs make paid access a hard sell. The source provides no evidence of developer willingness to pay for clones or access.

2. **Unclear whether AI agents will pay for code execution vs. scraping freely** — The agent royalties revenue stream assumes AI systems will transact through x402 rather than accessing code through public APIs or web scraping. No mechanism prevents free access.

3. **Repository NFT secondary markets are untested** — ENS domains have secondary markets because domain names are scarce and unique. Code repositories are abundant and fungible. No evidence that repository NFTs will trade like domain names.

4. **Competing with GitHub's zero-price model requires strong value proposition beyond ownership** — Developers choose GitHub for network effects (discoverability, collaboration), not ownership. Permanent storage and censorship resistance are features, not value propositions that justify switching costs.

---

Relevant Notes:
- [[cryptos primary use case is capital formation not payments or store of value because permissionless token issuance solves the fundraising bottleneck that solo founders and small teams face.md]] (token as capital formation mechanism)
- [[internet capital markets compress fundraising from months to days because permissionless raises eliminate gatekeepers while futarchy replaces due diligence bottlenecks with real-time market pricing.md]] (capital formation efficiency)

Topics:
- [[domains/internet-finance/_map]]
