What a licensee can show about what it used, and with whose permission.

One build, and the records that say what it was permitted to use.

What the register can show about a derived model is what was licensed for it, and nothing about what the model now contains. That sentence is the ceiling on everything below it, and the file is built so that it cannot be read as more.

Nothing is issued to make one. A permission file is an assembly, not a new record: the licences a licensee holds, the numbers and editions they name, the conditions carried from each Card, the receipts written for each use, and the withdrawal dates stated to each Source — gathered for one build and read in one place. Every part already exists here, written when it was written, for its own reason.

Why it is one build and not one company. A licence names editions; a build uses some of them. Asked of a company, the question has no edge and no answer that stays true for a week. Asked of one build — one model, one agent, one machine package — it has a boundary, and the boundary is what makes the file worth reading. Nothing is described as covered in general: cover is answered per use, against one number at one edition, on the Registry.

The question is already being asked; for what was licensed here, the answer is already on the record.

A provider that builds a model is asked what it built from and whether it was permitted. For material that passed through this register the answer already exists, because the register was designed around the parts of it: the address, the pinned edition, the licence and the receipt. None of it was left implicit, so none of it has to be reconstructed later.

Without those parts the question has no answer that can be checked. A body of material handed over in bulk has no edition, no count and no ending; a claim about it is a claim about somebody's memory of a transfer.

The file is therefore the licensee's own instrument rather than the register's. The register holds the licences, the editions, the receipts and the dates; the licensee is the party holding all of them for one build at once, and the party that can say which build they belong to.

Licences, editions, conditions, receipts, and the date stated to each Source.

What a permission file carries for one build

What it carries	What that line says
The licence	The paper held: its kind — execution, learning or derivative — its term, field of use and territory, and the actions named one by one inside it.
The number and the edition	The entry each licence names, and the frozen version it pins. An edition is sealed, and its seal can be checked.
The conditions	What each contributor put on what is made of their work, travelling from the Card into the licence — Rights.
The receipts	The signed rows for the uses the build was made from, read from both ends — Meter.
The withdrawal date	For a learning or derivative licence, the date stated to that Source before signing, at which the material comes out at the model's next revision.
The declared ancestry	What the licensee declared it built, against the edition it built from. A declared descendant is a recorded declaration, not a finding.

Read for one build, those lines are also the list a buyer asks a supplier for. A Knowledge Bill of Materials lists the numbers and editions a system is licensed to use, and what a buyer may ask for is on Enterprise. A bill of materials lists what was licensed, not what a model contains. The permission file is the wider record it is drawn from, carrying the licences, receipts and dates behind each line.

Nothing in the file is a measurement. No line says that a source was checked, or that one entry is better evidenced than another: every line records a permission and the date it was given.

An export a governance reader can take.

Already-written records, taken out. The same records, for one build, in the register's own form, taken by the licensee that holds them — an export of what is already written rather than a document drafted for an occasion, which is why it can be taken again later and say the same thing.

Why the reader is described that way. Whoever has to read what a system was permitted to use — inside the organisation that built it, or across the table from it — is a governance reader, and the description stops there on purpose: this page names no regulation, no regulator and no standard, and the export claims nothing under any of them. Where the register's own fields are written to travel is on Interoperability.

What it is not. Not a submission, not a certificate, not a statement that anything was met. It confers no mark and changes nothing about what the underlying licences permit.

Evidence of what was licensed here, and of nothing else.

It says nothing about material licensed elsewhere, or licensed nowhere. A permission file covers what passed through this register. Material a licensee obtained on other terms, or on none, sits outside it entirely, and the file neither counts that material nor conceals it: the boundary of what it holds is part of what it states. Read as an account of everything a build touched, it has been read as something it never claimed to be.

It makes no claim about what is inside a model. The register holds papers, editions, rows and dates. What a model retains once built is not a thing a second party can check, and a record that asserted it would be selling a certainty nobody can produce. The register never claims a model has forgotten anyone.

It is not a finding about title. This register records what was asserted, who asserted it, on what date, and what evidence was produced with it. It records that it has not tested the assertion. It does not decide who owns anything. What was filed with an assertion at the intake is the evidence package, held licensee-side and produced on a dispute — For AI.

It is not a ladder. There is no class, grade or rung here, and a build with a longer file does not stand above one with a shorter file. The one public status word is Specified, and it says what kind of record an entry is, not how well anybody is doing.

The date is in the file because it was given to the person before they signed.

Material used to build a model comes out at the model's next revision, and that date is stated to the person before they sign. The register never claims a model has forgotten anyone. Those two sentences travel together wherever a learning or derivative licence is described. The date is the one line in the record fixed before anything was built, and carrying it forward for each licence is what makes a withdrawal actionable afterwards — a build, a list of editions in it, and for each one a date the licensee already agreed to.

The other kind ends differently. Under an execution licence there is no build to revise: It stops for new work at once; a job already underway finishes. A file for a build that only runs licensed references carries that ending instead, and the two rules are never collapsed into one.

The same file, read by the buyer, by the Source and by counsel.

For the procurement officer. One file per build, drawn from the register and readable line by line: each line resolves to a number, each number to a Card, and each Card's edition is sealed. Asked for in a specification it is a list a supplier can produce; asked for after a dispute has started it is an exercise nobody finishes.

For the Source. The file is assembled from the same record they read back from their own end: their number, their editions, the licences taken against them, the uses counted and the date they were given before signing. Nothing appears in a licensee's file that the Source cannot see from theirs — Bring your records.

For counsel. What the file warrants is what a signed row warrants: that a licence was recorded, an edition pinned, a use counted against both, and a date stated. It is evidence of permissions relied on, with its own ceiling written into the same document.