As we now know from looking at what is going on with Tezos there are challenges to protect projects from "the human factor" and to protect developers, contributors, investors, and users, from each other. Not all problems can be solved in code using technical or cryptographic solutions and some problems require using contract law or civil law.
The law protects projects when projects adopt the correct legal structuring. The law attacks projects when projects adopt the incorrect legal structuring. If we look at for instance Dan Larimer with the projects he has been involved with he has always been proactive and defensive with regard to legal structuring. Whether or not Bitshares would be seen as a security or Steemit would be seen as a security was discussed from the beginning of the design process and even the launch was done in a way to limit legal liabilities which could hurt the project.
In other words legal risks do exist but at the same time the lack of the use of legal structures where appropriate and necessary also opens projects up to risk. Now we watch as Tezos collapses in a fight over money due to the fact that human factors and proper legal structuring were not considered carefully enough. In my opinion it's not a matter of how much money is raised but a matter of having both technical and legal protections in place to protect a project even from it's own founders.
In my opinion Tezos will survive this of course but will not look good in the media.