The law hands a holder nothing, so the promise is built.

A contributor signs with Even Steven too.

A Records skill set is built from paper rather than seat time, and there are two kinds of Source. The professional comes first: a named person's practice, where the Source is the person, named on the Card. A company's records come second, the Source being the company, coded and never named publicly.

Either way the paper is Even Steven's. A contributor consents tier by tier, is paid under that agreement, and is given a view of every serve made from their records. A pooled seat is a Mosaic of per-contributor sets, each with its own number, count and withdrawal.

A records reference captures knowledge that can be written down, never the somatic or the collective kind. The paper says which grade is being bought — the kind of knowledge, and the kind of copy: only a copy the Source has marked licensable is ever built from, and a coded copy and a private copy are different kinds that never travel. Records are never used to build a model. What is brought and what is never taken is on Bring your records.

Ending it, and the one delay in the sentence.

A permission ends the way it was given: one paper at a time, in writing, without a reason.

It stops for new work at once; a job already underway finishes.

There is one delay in that sentence. Stopping a machine part-way through a pass is its own hazard, so a job already started runs out. Nothing new starts from the day the withdrawal arrives. On Records the unit is a serve, so a withdrawal there takes effect at the next serve.

Withdrawal carries two dates, and the register never collapses them into one. The first is the out-of-service date: the day the job already underway has finished and nothing runs it anywhere. The second is the true date: the day every copy is gone, backups included.

Material used to train a model comes out when that model is next built, and that date is stated to the person before they sign.

Withdrawal is never a breach. It costs nothing and nobody can extend it. The withdrawal itself stays on file.

The name is the address.

You own your skill, always and forever. The record is held under licence and never bought. A way of working is found, licensed, counted and ended under the name of the person whose it is, and the Tacit Tessera number sits beside the name, never instead of it.

That is provenance. Nothing here is dissolved into a general model, so nothing has to be traced back out of one: ours is counting, not attribution.

A tile carries the mark of the house that collected the skill set — Even Steven on the hands it collects, Steady Eddie on Machine and on the hands its Trainer brings, Strategic Agent on Records. Ownership is Even Steven's on every track; the Card carries it in words.

Separability is the condition, not a feature.

A set is a shelf, not a stew.

Several numbers can be licensed under one paper without losing their edges. Each member keeps its own number, name, count and ending; a member taken off the shelf leaves, and the rest stay. Every other promise on this page rests on that, and the published research is precise about why:

• Verifying, from a delivered model's parameters, that one person's influence was removed is a formal result: it cannot be done, and it is formally unavailable from the model itself.
• Removing that influence from a large generative model by approximate unlearning has not been achieved: no published method has survived an adversarial evaluation.
• Exact unlearning at generative scale is absent: no published construction exists at that scale.
• Weights released openly cannot be recalled, and for published weights no mechanism can exist. Tacit Tessera never publishes weights.
• Retraining from scratch is always correct and always available, at a price. That is what makes the honest version of the promise affordable at this size.

A right to withdraw can be honoured today in a database, a retrieval index, a small model, and anything kept separately addressable. It cannot be honoured, in any way a second party can check, in a large generative model built the ordinary way. So separability is designed in from the start.

A record is not a judgment about a person.

The rule is one sentence: a record is never supplied to assess the person, to an insurer or to anyone else.

There is no ranking inside a family, no score, no paid placement, no order that can be bought, and no field on a Card compares one person with another.

A machine never receives a session.

What reaches a machine is a sealed package built for the controls that machine already has. It carries no recording, and nothing identifying the person beyond the name it runs under.

Weights are never published. A release travels; the recording stays in Canada.

On Records, figures leave only as bands over many jobs. No single job's figure is served.

A check shows that this number, this edition and this seal are the ones the register issued, and that the copy checked is untouched. It does not establish ownership, and it does not show that no copy exists elsewhere. A permission written into a file is a label, not a lock: enforcement lives where the reference is served.

A file can be copied and its label stripped; a served reference cannot, because every answer carries its citations. A numbered edition served under licence is the product; a copied file is only a key.

Where the law is open, it is said plainly.

Every open question here is written the same way: the question, the fact that it is open, and what was built.

The question. Does paying a person for a recording make their consent valid?

It is open. The instruments are set out on the legal position, with a second open question there: whose documents a career's practice files are.

What is built. The person's paper is with Even Steven — not the employer whose power is the reason the question exists. The payment follows the hour the machine runs, not the signature.