Good question, and having some background helps to understand the concern.
I know of nothing that would give the founders such a right, and as I linked above, the conditions (including multi-sig) are set up quite contrary to such an idea.
Do you happen to know if Ripple had a loophole? Or did they have some agreement and just break it? Or maybe just no precautions were taken?
Even "ownership" is not straightforward here, though a good example of why they say "possession is 9/10ths of the law" regarding property. Tokens are an artifact of the software, which is open source. Certainly, Synereo Ltd, and the 3rd party administrators, have control over the funds, limited to the conditions set forth in the agreement. Management has made it clear from the beginning that the user community would be heard in making these decisions, and so far, that has been proven true.
As Dor said recently, we work toward ways to communicate plans as they become available.
Seriously you have to stop being handwavy about everything.
Each single time I ask you a question you give a lengthy indirect avoiding answer.
Don't pretend there is no such thing as "legal ownership" of crypto tokens so that you don't need to take a position about who owns the premine. There is such a thing as legal ownership of crypto assets. There have been court cases all around the world around allocation of Bitcoins (Silkroad trial, MtGox liquidation, pirateat40 scam etc.) or other assets (Ripple Inc vs Jed MacCaleb). Ripple Inc. has even created a holding company XRP2 Inc. that legally owns their XRP premine and which is itself fully owned by Ripple Inc. Ethereum has also stated legal ownershio of the Ether and Bitcoin they own etc. Tomorrow if someone steals 1M AMPs you will go to report that to authority as theft won't you? So stop the handwaving and trying to pull with asset ownership the same stunt as you tried to pull earlier with marketcap which you claim bizarrely doesn't apply to crypto assets.
Let's get to the point: on bnktothefuture there are videos of Don and Greg saying as much as one of the reasons Synereo equity is valuable is because Synereo is the holder of the AMPs premine. So now I want a clear answer. Who legally owns the premine?
Don't try to weasel out of that one or I will make it a personal matter to air as widely as possible the fact Synereo is very shady and dodgy about what it does and sells, and doing all it can to avoid providing any transparency to investors and community even at the very time where it is trying to sell actual equity.