The way "the dao" paper was represented, basically every coin that has an ico is actually at least in some spectrum of being classified as a security. What we are doing is waiting for our council to guide us as to the best way to handle the current landscape as well as prepare us best for the shifting landscape of the future.
Basically a security is defined loosely as any common business where there is expectation of profit, nothing to do with dividends etc really, its more about how things are structured. Even just simply using the term ICO at the moment basically starts the 'branding' of it being a security, at least in the spectrum of it.
The goal is to be able to move forward with the guidance of our lawyers while not completely butchering the functionality.
What you will see a lot of people going on about in chats and stuff (or when people ask why a certain token etc isn't on an exchange) is that 'it offers dividends/payouts so it is a security' That simply isn't true, people really don't understand very well what a security is, but people getting payouts doesn't make it one specifically. Although MASS is still different than that even, but that is what the lawyers are for.