Shared venture. Separate contracts.
Every platform can host two companies' services. The hard part was never the software — it's that one of them ends up running the other's infrastructure. do.place is built so that never happens: every participant contracts directly with us, and nobody is downstream of anybody.
why multi-party ventures stall
the due-diligence wall.
A regulated firm relying on a partner's technology must vet it, contract control over it, and keep auditing it — FINMA and EBA outsourcing rules leave no shortcut. Ventures die in this review before they ever launch.
the operator's shadow.
On operator-run platforms, one party holds the platform contract and everyone else joins on that party's terms — a guest in their infrastructure, dependent on their uptime, their security posture, their renewal.
the liability tangle.
When partners host each other, every incident is a two-board conversation. Whose breach? Whose customer data? Whose auditors get access?
the approach
one venue, separate contracts.
Everyone meets in the same branded venue. Legally, each participant holds a direct licence with do.place — anchored, per participant, in the Entity Registry.
shared service, standalone standing.
Your service and your partner's sit in one catalog. Each participant's contract stands alone — nobody's terms depend on anybody else's.
partners, not providers.
Because no participant runs another's technology, no participant becomes another's technology vendor — so partner-on-partner technology due diligence has nothing to attach to. Each firm assesses one provider: us.
nobody is subordinate.
Your name on the venue, your book of business, your contract. The same is true for every party on the board.
not a slide — a record.
The bilateral licence is implemented, not promised: the Entity Registry anchors each participant's contract with do.place.
Context: under FINMA and EBA outsourcing rules, a regulated firm that depends on a partner's technology must contractually control and continuously audit that dependency. Direct contracts mean that dependency doesn't arise between participants — each firm's assessment points at one infrastructure provider instead of at each other. This is the contracting model financial market infrastructure has always used: every participant a direct member, no participant a subcontractor.
asked, answered.
if my partner leaves, what happens to me?
Nothing contractual. Your licence never referenced them.
who do our auditors talk to?
Us, about us. Your partner's operation was never inside your audit scope, because it was never your vendor.
is this a legal opinion?
No. It's a description of how contracting on do.place is structured. Your counsel and compliance function make their own determination — we'll give them everything they need to make it quickly.
does this work for a joint venture between two regulated firms?
That's the case it was designed for. Both firms contract with us; neither becomes the other's outsourcing provider; the venue is shared and the accountability isn't.
building something with a partner?
tell us what the venture looks like — private alpha.