The CLARITY Act could pass in 2026. What that means for your IP strategy

The regulatory landscape for digital assets in the United States is approaching a turning point — and most of the public conversation is missing the IP dimension entirely.

Where the legislation stands

The House Financial Services Committee held a dedicated hearing in March 2026 titled "Tokenization and the Future of Securities: Modernizing Our Capital Markets" — described by industry press as the most significant congressional examination of tokenization to date. The session arrived at a decisive moment: the tokenized real-world asset market had already reached $26.48 billion in distributed on-chain value, up over 5% in a single month.

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act — known as the CLARITY Act — aims to resolve one of the industry's most persistent problems: determining whether a given digital asset falls under SEC or CFTC jurisdiction. Industry leaders have flagged June 2026 as a critical window, with Senate scheduling determining whether the bill advances this year or faces further delay.

In parallel, the GENIUS Act's stablecoin framework comment period closed on June 2, 2026, with the Senate expected to resume discussion shortly after. Congress is expected to advance a broader digital asset market structure package in 2026, with SEC and CFTC rulemaking processes potentially extending into late 2026 or 2027.

What the legislation actually clarifies — and what it doesn't

The emerging framework confirms an important principle: tokenization is being treated as a delivery method, not a new asset class. Tokenized securities, fund interests, and real-world assets are expected to follow the same underlying regulatory rules as their off-chain equivalents — including registration, reporting, and transfer restrictions.

This is meaningful for compliance. It is largely silent on intellectual property.

Regulatory clarity on whether your token is a security or a commodity does not answer who owns the technology behind your tokenization mechanism, whether your platform's architecture is patentable or infringing on existing patents, how your trademark protection extends — or doesn't — into your tokenized product offering, and what licensing structure governs the IP rights embedded in a tokenized asset.

Why this matters now — not after the legislation passes

The USPTO has already demonstrated that tokenization technology is patentable subject matter. In June 2026 alone, one company received a Notice of Allowance for a patent covering "tokenized minting, authentication, and utilization of assets" — part of a broader portfolio covering the asset, content, and data layers of a tokenization platform. That same patent family underpins commercial tokenization contracts reportedly worth over $750 million in a single quarter.

This signals two things for any business building in this space. First, the technical infrastructure of tokenization can be protected — meaning your competitive advantage may be defensible if structured correctly. Second, the patent landscape is filling in quickly, which increases the risk of building on territory someone else has already claimed.

The practical IP questions every RWA or tokenization founder should be asking right now:

→ Is the technical mechanism behind our tokenization platform patentable, and have we taken steps to protect it? 

→ Have we conducted a freedom-to-operate analysis against the current and emerging patent landscape in this space? 

→ Does our trademark protection extend to the specific classes covering blockchain-based tokens, virtual goods, and digital asset platforms under the current Nice Classification framework? 

→ Are our licensing agreements with technology partners, developers, and contractors structured to ensure the company — not individual contributors — owns the resulting IP? 

→ As regulatory clarity arrives, are we prepared for the IP due diligence scrutiny that will follow — particularly from institutional investors and potential acquirers?

What we're advising clients to do in this window?

 “The period before comprehensive legislation passes is not a period to wait. It is the period to structure IP defensively — while the regulatory framework is still being finalized, and while the patent landscape in tokenization is still developing rather than fully mature.

At Name & Fame, we help founders and growing businesses in the digital asset space build IP strategies that anticipate where regulation is heading — not just where it currently stands. — Yulia Leshchenko, Name&Fame Co-founder.”