The DAO itself is a dumb object, incapable of moral or ethical reasoning, while the people behind it are not.
However, the people behind the DAO are effectively anonymized, are they not? The entity which commits the act is culpable, but the law usually goes after accomplices or enablers as well.
Unless I'm thinking about this all wrongly, this opens up a really messy can of worms and we now live in a world where you have to watch your back at every turn.
Which isn't to say it wasn't already like that, but it's been turned up to eleven now.
As an example:
DAO[A] is created by individuals for the purpose of doxxing one of the founders of slock.it. DAO[B] answer the call and gather the information providing it to DAO[A] who contracts with DAO[C1] to publish the information on a server paid for by DAO[C2], who then does so.
The founder and/or his family (all the founders of slock.it are male, apparently) are now potentially exposed to harm.
Is this a likely scenario? Do we now have to have a Rule 35 that says if there's a thing that can be done, a DAO will exist for it?