I do not see from the whitepaper how this protocol is not differentiating between parties. In fact, the white papers states that the protocol has, by design, a mechanism to differentiate:
“0x will be deployed to the Ethereum blockchain with a fixed supply of protocol tokens that will be issued to partnering dApps and future end users. Protocol tokens will have two uses: for market participants to pay transaction fees to Relayers and for decentralized governance over updates to the protocol.”
So, it looks like the “partners” and “relayers” are clearly different to “end users”, which are clearly different to everyone who doesn’t have any protocol tokens. What prevents the majority of protocol token owners to screw the minority and vote in changes that are not in the minority interest? Nothing. That’s what exactly happens with the normal financial systems. The “rich“ vote in the rules that are not favarouble to the “poor”.
Sure, I understand, in the long run, you want to be payed for your contribution and your efforts, so, having the “protocol token” or in-built currency offers you means to control who “is the partner”.
If your goal is to have a truly open protocol, it has to come with no strings attached, and no in-protocol currency, and no pre-releasing mined tokens. It has to have no barriers of entry, and no barriers of participation. The protocol updates have to be done in open fashion, such that the market decides if they want to adapt the changes, or continue to operate with the old protocol. Otherwise, in the long run, the “protocol” can always end up derailed through majority voting.