There is an obvious distinction to be made between two classes of digital tokens:
1. tokens pegged to real world assets by consensus of the value of those.. like bitUSD
2. tokens that are suggested to actually represent instances of real world assets.. like bitCarRegistration
The blockchain, for all its ability to act as third party authority cannot bridge the gap from the internet to the real world.
So, the substantial question that follows for that second class, is what needs to be done to make the link between tokens and assets, apparent and legally binding, expecting that the courts will need to acknowledge them at some point. Is that simply down to each company to satisfy the consumer that they will honour those assets; or is there already a minimum standard legal contract template that would do for this; or does something new need to be created?? I wonder there might be firms already selling real gold but is that just on the back of their credibility - or will such tokens always carry risk and be liable to whatever firm is selling those?
Incidentally, I saw recently Mastercoin has apparently opted to use the same law firm in Switzerland as Ethereum and others, so a more rounded sense of these types of questions might follow from all similar efforts.