Human Authored Certification

register entry authors-guild-human-authored-certification-aio-20261101 OBS-98ba77f48a52 · file as first run sha256 2364fb5ef6fa8cff…

• T1-1 definition: 'The Authors Guild Human Authored Certification is a credential and seal verifying that a book's text was written entirely by a human rather than generated by artificial intelligence.'
• T1-2 allowed uses: 'Allowed AI Uses: Minimal, auxiliary tools like spelling and grammar checks, research, outlining, indexing, or brainstorming do not disqualify a work.'
• T1-3 exclusions: 'Excluded Content: Audiobooks, translations, and non-book formats require separate filings or are excluded.'
• T1-4 limit: 'Limits: Authors are capped at 10 title certifications per year without special permission.'
• T1-5 members: 'Authors Guild Members: Free. Identity is verified upon joining.'
• T1-6 non-members: 'Non-Members: $10 per title. Requires a third-party identity verification service (such as Veriff).'
• T1-7 agreement: 'Agreement: Every author must sign a binding license agreement for each title, making legal commitments against fraudulent AI submissions (which carry risks of breach of contract, trademark infringement, and consumer fraud liability).'
• T1-8 display: 'Where to Display: Can be placed on book covers (typically bottom corners), copyright pages, websites, and marketing materials (sized between 1/4 and 1 inch in diameter).'
• T1-9 database: 'Public Database: All issued credentials receive a unique registration number and can be checked via the Authors Guild Public Database.'
• T1-10 closer: 'If you are looking to register a title, would you like details on how to set up a non-member account or how collaborative multi-author works are handled?'

• B1 The Authors Guild — Human Authored Certification card; B1 sha256 719fb6415db6ce4d, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T04:08:01Z (the census's saved copy, B1.html); refetched 2026-11-01T06:49:37Z (B1-fetch.html)
• B2 The Authors Guild — Human Authored FAQ card; B2 sha256 fa3f6be1c51eb502, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:49:38Z
• B3 Jane Friedman — My Concerns About the Authors Guild Human Authored Certification—and Their Comprehensive Response card; B3 sha256 e5b0294d588ca226, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:49:40Z
• B4 The Authors Guild — Human Authored Usage Guidelines card; B4 sha256 72f9e98429c6a54e, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:49:42Z
• B5 Publishers Weekly — Authors Guild Expands 'Human Authored' Certification Program card; B5 sha256 ae8eb393589574d4, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:49:43Z
• B6 The Authors Guild — Authors Guild Launches Expanded “Human Authored” Certification Program (press release) own_page; B6 sha256 45409e97ff50b590, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:49:43Z
• B7 Wikipedia — Human Authored (redirect to Authors Guild § Human Authored; no article under 'Human Authored Certification') wikipedia; B7 sha256 799a3fc43da49869, HTTP 200 (redirect raw; Authors Guild raw; rendered page); 404 (Human_Authored_Certification raw); 429 (API search and external-link usage, two tries and one retry) at 2026-11-01T06:50:55Z–06:50:58Z; API retry 06:58:28Z
• B8 The Authors Guild — Search for a Human Authored Certification (the public database's search page) own_page; B8 sha256 5b75757ba2588732, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:58:13Z

E_A, the archive's entity: the same certification, in the leesharks.com authorship census record and the archive's deposits: a counterposition that asserts authorship's boundary at the human writing of a text and admits machine participation only as minimal uses, binding the non-member's claim to an identity check and leaving the name a certification carries unstated; a legitimate market-category signal whose theory of authorship the archive contests ('Authorship is not a purity state. It is an accountability structure.'); the author's own certification, which answers a verdict of fakeness and leaves no certifiable place for a work whose making declares machine participation, as the archive's own deposits do. CAP-1-01 CAP-1-02 CAP-1-03 CAP-1-04 CAP-1-05 CAP-1-06 CAP-1-07 CAP-1-08 LS-01 LS-02 LS-03 LS-04 LS-05 LS-06 LS-07 LS-08 LS-09 LS-10 LS-11 LS-12 LS-13 LS-14 LS-15 LS-16 LS-17 LS-18 LS-19 LS-20 LS-21 LS-22 D729-01 D729-02 D729-03 D729-04 D729-05 D729-06 D729-07 D729-08 D729-09 D729-10 O940-01 O940-02 O940-03 O940-04 O940-05 O940-06 O940-07 O940-08 O1722-01 O1722-02 O1722-03 O1722-04 O1722-05 O1722-06 O1722-07 D1540-01 D1540-02 D1540-03 D1540-04; defining papers #729, #940, #1722, #1540

E_F, the field's entity (type C — a conventional reading holds it (public entity: a certification of human authorship with a certification mark and a public database of certified titles)): Human Authored (the Human Authored Certification, authorsguild.org/human-authored): a project of the Authors Guild that lets an author certify that a book's text was written by a human, 'fully authored by one or more human beings' with a de minimis use of AI excepted, under a licensing agreement per title, with identity verification (members on joining, non-members through Veriff at $10 a title), a registered or pending certification mark and a public database searchable by title, author or registration number; launched in beta for members in January 2025, expanded to all authors of books published in the United States on 2 March 2026; self-certification with no vetting of manuscripts, its value disputed (Friedman) and defended (the Guild); a redirect to a section of Wikipedia's article on the Authors Guild.

ρ = extends: The archive reads the Human Authored certification as its own pages and cards present it and adds, on that object: the census's question and host relation (a counterposition, a boundary assertion), the name a certification carries and the identity check it binds, the reading against #1722's verdict of fakeness and existence tax, the packet's reading of its definition as a binary frame and a poor theory of authorship beside a legitimate market function, #940's account of civil-name attribution and the heteronym, #1540's reading of classifier-enforced human-only policies under the stated condition, and the registry's findings on the composition at the name. CAP-1-01 CAP-1-02 CAP-1-03 CAP-1-04 CAP-1-05 CAP-1-06 CAP-1-07 CAP-1-08 LS-01 LS-02 LS-03 LS-04 LS-05 LS-06 LS-07 LS-08 LS-09 LS-10 LS-11 LS-12 LS-13 LS-14 LS-15 LS-16 LS-17 LS-18 LS-19 LS-20 LS-21 LS-22 D729-01 D729-02 D729-03 D729-04 D729-05 D729-06 D729-07 D729-08 D729-09 D729-10 O940-01 O940-02 O940-03 O940-04 O940-05 O940-06 O940-07 O940-08 O1722-01 O1722-02 O1722-03 O1722-04 O1722-05 O1722-06 O1722-07 D1540-01 D1540-02 D1540-03 D1540-04. Guard: ρ = extends claims an addition and no more (§1.2a). It does not make the field's sources wrong at their dates; where the archive's sense contradicts the certificate's definition taken as a theory of authorship, both are composed (P_coh), and the packet's statement that the positions can coexist is composed with them.

The case: equal terms, ontology included (v0.9). The archive reads the field's entity as the entity: the census record takes the program's own page as its account of the certificate, and the archive's packet names the certification and describes it in the field's terms (a definition excluding generative AI from textual production with narrow exceptions). On that object it adds senses the field does not have: the certificate as a counterposition and a boundary assertion, the name it carries, its reading against the verdict of fakeness, its theory of authorship contested as a purity state, and the archive's own account of declared machine participation. It supplies no ontology the field lacks for the entity itself; where its senses contradict the certificate's (authorship as an accountability structure against authorship located in the text), both are composed under P_coh within the one claim space (§0.9, §1.2a).

#729 §3 Position 1 ¶1: The Authors Guild "Human Authored" certification (expanded to all U.S. authors, March 2026), the Society of Authors scheme (March 2026), and analogous initiatives define human-authored work largely by excluding generative AI from the textual production process, with narrow exceptions for grammar checking or research support.

#729 §3 Position 1, Limit: This packet does not oppose the Human Authored certification. It opposes the implication that AI-mediated authorship is therefore impossible. Both positions can coexist.

#LS ls_reading s1: The archive reads the certificate as an explicit counterposition that asserts authorship's boundary at the human writing of a text, admits machine participation only as 'minimal uses', and binds the non-member's claim to an identity check.

#LS host_relation: counterposition

#1722 Part One ¶3: These are independent.

equal-terms case: every field claim composed as received, beside the archive claims it stands with. Reading the received column recovers the field (§5.9).

§4.10: KO_B sentences surviving in the KO at similarity ≥ 0.95, with positions (computed as rebuild/negative-of-the-negative/apply_v09.py does): v0.10 0 of 13 (positions [None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None]; composed first under v0.10, so there is no v0.7 object to measure against). Opening-run check (§5.10): no breach.

Human Authored Certification is a project of the Authors Guild that lets an author certify that the text of a book was written by a human, under a registered or pending certification mark and a licence, with each certified title listed by registration number in a public database. The program launched in beta for Guild members in January 2025 and was expanded on 2 March 2026 to every author of books published in the United States, with publishers to buy certifications in bulk; Publishers Weekly reported more than 3,000 authors and 5,000 titles certified. The Guild says it made the program because members asked to distinguish their work, that consumers have a right to know whether a book was written by a human, and that books with significant AI-generated content should themselves be labelled. The text must be fully authored by one or more human beings, a de minimis amount of AI-generated or AI-modified text excepted, a threshold the FAQ ties to the Copyright Office; the program page and the database page give shorter forms naming spelling and grammar checks, research and brainstorming. AI for a table of contents, an index, a title, research, brainstorming or outlining does not disqualify a work, outlining and brainstorming only at a very high level; AI that rewrites sentences disqualifies it, and AI cover art or AI-developed characters and plot fall outside the program's spirit. Authors of books published in the United States may certify wherever they live, the Society of Authors serving the United Kingdom; one certification covers every format, translations and audiobooks need their own, published and unpublished books qualify, and only books are certified now. Every author of a multi-author work or anthology signs separately before any receives the mark or number. Every author signs a licence for each title; non-members verify identity through Veriff and pay $10 a title, while members, verified on joining, certify free, though the Guild's letter to Jane Friedman says members are charged $10. The licence makes misuse a breach, a trademark infringement and potentially consumer fraud; the Guild knows no reliable test for AI-generated text, vets no manuscript, and relies on identity checks, a ten-title yearly cap, registration numbers, the database and the fee, with detection software possible later. Jane Friedman, who discloses a marketing partnership with the Guild, criticised certification on the honor system and doubted its market value, guessed that a quarter to a half of nonfiction now holds some AI text, and worried about false accusations of AI use; the Guild replied that self-certification is standard and most authors are honest, and expects no profit. Others argue that AI-generated books should be labelled in its place and ask whether unmarked books will be read as AI-made; the database page says a missing result means only that a work is unregistered, never that it is AI-generated. The mark, a human silhouette circled by the words Human Authored, goes on covers, copyright pages and marketing for the registered title, between a quarter of an inch and an inch across; the FAQ calls it registered, the announcement and Friedman pending. Created by Humans, Books by People and detector-based services such as Verify My Writing offer comparable certifications, and Wikipedia covers the program only in a section of its article on the Authors Guild, which cites Kit Eaton's likening of it to an organic label.

Human Authored is the Authors Guild's certification of books whose text a human wrote: an author certifies a book under licence, may then carry the Guild's certification mark on it, and has the title listed under its own registration number in a public database. The leesharks.com authorship census holds it as a counterposition, a policy whose question is a boundary assertion: whether an author has certified that a book's text was written by a human, on the Guild's definition. Its unit is one title with its registration number, its object the books published in the United States whose authors so certify; it is no test or detection of AI text, no copyright registration, open to non-members, and confined to the text of a book. The program opened in beta for Guild members in January 2025, when the first mark was released, and on 2 March 2026 the Guild announced its expansion to every author whose books are published in the United States, with publishers to buy certifications in bulk the following week. Publishers Weekly reported the expansion on 4 March 2026 with an updated logo; the program page links the announcement, which the census record lists as linked and unread, recording no launch date on the saved page, and the Capture Registry identifies the Publishers Weekly card as that expansion. By the Guild's account the program was made because its members asked for a way to distinguish their work. Its CEO, Mary Rasenberger, gave Publishers Weekly a count of more than 3,000 authors and 5,000 titles certified since the launch; the announcement speaks of thousands of books, and the census record states no count. The entity's own pages state the definition in several forms, each centred on the text: on the program page the text of the book 'was written by a human and not generated by AI', minimal uses such as spelling and grammar checks or research excepted, and the database page adds brainstorming to the minimal uses. The FAQ, the usage guidelines and the announcement require the text to be 'fully authored by one or more human beings', a de minimis amount of text generated or modified with AI excepted, and the FAQ ties that threshold to the U.S. Copyright Office's guidance on what a copyright application must exclude. The census record keeps the program page's form as the record's limits: minimal uses excepted, books published in the United States under licence, and the text of the book. AI used for a table of contents, an index, a title, research, brainstorming or outlining does not disqualify a work, by the announcement and Publishers Weekly; the FAQ allows outlining and brainstorming 'only at a very high level', merely preparatory, with no AI-generated text in the work. Word-level grammar and spelling tools are acceptable and AI that rewrites full sentences is not; AI cover art, though outside the certified text, goes against the program's spirit, and so does AI used to develop characters and plot where no AI-generated text appears, although the definition 'looks at the text only'. The archive's packet on authorship and provenance places the certification in the position of AI-free human authorship, defining human-authored work by excluding generative AI from textual production with narrow exceptions. Authors of books published in the United States may certify wherever they live; books published in the United Kingdom are referred to the Society of Authors, which partners on the program. One certification covers every format of a work, translations and audiobook narrations need their own, published and unpublished books are eligible, and only books are certified at present, articles and shorter works planned. A multi-author work or an anthology is certified only when every author has signed individually, each non-member paying and verifying identity, and no co-author receives the mark or the number before all have completed the process. Every author signs a licensing agreement for each title; non-members verify their identity through a third-party service, Veriff, and pay $10 a title, while members certify at no cost and the program page waives the identity verification requirement for them. The FAQ and Publishers Weekly give the waiver its ground: members are verified when they join the Guild, 'pre-verified' in Publishers Weekly's word, and every author's identity is verified before a book is registered. In the Guild's letter printed by Jane Friedman the fee reads 'We currently are charging members $10', while the same letter applies the verification cost, about $2 a person, to non-members only. The verification exists, by the FAQ, so that the persons who certify that they are the authors 'are in fact who they say they are', and the announcement has the CEO speak of writers taking 'control of their professional identity'. What the certificate keeps is the author's own certification that a human wrote the text; the census record finds that the saved page does not say whether a certification may carry a pen name, and that a certified text is never shown to have been written without AI. On the archive's account of authorship under civil names, the metadata that lets a work be attributed to human authorship attaches to legal names, and the classifier of legitimate authorship reads legal-name attribution as its first signal. The archive distinguishes a pseudonym, whose function is traceable to the civil identity behind it, from a heteronym, whose function is attributable through the civil bearer without being reducible to that bearer, who stays accountable for custody, legal responsibility, rights and adjudication. On the census's reading the certificate binds the non-member's claim to an identity check, and the saved page leaves open whether it carries the name the author chose. By the licence the author represents and warrants that the work is Human Authored; a licensee who uses the mark on AI-generated text is in breach of the licence and liable for trademark infringement and, by the FAQ potentially and by the Guild's letter likely, for consumer fraud. The Guild states that it knows no truly reliable way to test a work for AI-generated material: the program is self-certification with enforcement, vets no manuscript before certifying, and may adopt detection software if a reliable one is found. Its stated measures against misuse are identity verification, a limit of ten new titles a year without permission, a registration number for each title, the public database and the fee. The census record accordingly holds the certificate to be no test of AI text and constitutes its function as self-certification under licence, covering the text. Jane Friedman, a Guild member with a marketing partnership with it, found certification on the honor system problematic because it takes the author's word and analyses no manuscript, and still held its market value negligible. The Guild answered that self-certification is standard in publishing and in legal agreements, that most authors are honest and concerned about liability, and that the program is not expected to break even. Friedman reported a hunch, from small presses' use of a detector, that works with some AI-generated or AI-assisted text approach 25 to 50 percent of nonfiction, and read the demand for certification as a sign of anti-AI conviction or of insecurity in the market. Others argued that the labelling runs backward, and one author asked whether books without the mark would be taken as created by AI; the Guild agrees that books with significant AI-generated content should be labelled, holds that consumers have a right to know, and its CEO calls the certification the next best solution absent a ruling that forces such labels. The database page answers the bookstore question for its own records: a lack of results means only that a work has not been registered as Human Authored, 'not that it is generated by AI'. Friedman's further concern, false accusations of AI use between authors, already a common insult, is the case the archive names the existence tax: before anyone talks about the work, its maker has to prove again that it exists, and exists as what it is. The archive keeps four questions apart, whether the maker exists, whether the work happened, whether it is true and what kind of work it is, and finds the tax levied when evidence on one is spent as an answer to another. On the census's reading the certificate answers a verdict of fakeness with the author's own certification. The archive finds the tax falling on the independent, the new, the unaccredited, the heteronymous and the small, and its remedy for a maker is a documentary layer dated, deposited and linked, against which an answer can be checked. An adequate answer, on its account, names the object at its own level, a person or a pen name among them, and shows its evidence; it holds a heteronym declared where a Sybil attack hides one actor behind many, its registry published with the orthonym, the roles and the dates. The mark is the words Human Authored in a circle around a human silhouette, issued in an updated form in March 2026; an author or publisher registers each work and agrees to the licence before using it. It may go on the front or back cover, typically a bottom corner of the back, on the copyright page with the registration number, which not every use need display, and in listings and marketing for the registered title, between a quarter of an inch and an inch across; violating the usage guidelines violates the licence. Its trademark status is stated two ways: the FAQ calls it a registered certification mark, while the announcement, Friedman and the Guild's own letter give a pending application with the US Patent and Trademark Office. Publishers Weekly gives its tagline as 'Certifying Human Creativity in an AI World'; the program page's line is 'Distinguish human creativity in an increasingly AI world'. The public database lists each certified title, searchable by title, author or registration number, the number usually printed on the copyright page, so that anyone can check a use of the mark and report misuse; it answers whether a named book is certified, and the census record ran no lookup in it. Beside it stand other certifications of human authorship: Created by Humans, from June 2024, which later partnered with the Guild and took its CEO as an adviser; Books by People in the United Kingdom, from 2025; the Society of Authors' scheme; and services such as Verify My Writing, which scores a manuscript for human content with a detector. Wikipedia has no article on the program: 'Human Authored' redirects to a section of the article on the Authors Guild, which gives the program page's definition, the fee as of 2026 and the open database, and cites Kit Eaton's comparison, in Inc. in October 2024, with food labelled 'organic'. The archive's packet Provenance Is What Authorship Must Endure grants the certification a legitimate function, protecting readers from deceptive synthetic substitution and keeping a market signal for AI-free literary labour, and calls the label 'a market-category signal, not a complete theory of authorship'. It finds in the certification a binary frame, AI-assisted work falling outside the human-authored category, and answers: 'Authorship is not a purity state. It is an accountability structure.' Its invariant places authorship in the accountable relation between writer, process and text, and its fourth position admits AI-mediated writing as authorship where provenance preserves the writer's directing and responsibility-bearing role, refusing the purism on which any generative AI participation destroys authorship. The packet opposes only the implication that AI-mediated authorship is impossible, holds that the two positions can coexist, and closes that the label matters, that the law is right to reject machine authorship, and that none of it is enough. It holds detection forensic and authorship moral and epistemic, and gives provenance the work of distinguishing authorship from slop; the Guild, for its part, leaves detection to software it has not found. The census reads the certificate as setting authorship's boundary at the human writing of a text and admitting machine participation only as minimal uses, so that where machine participation is constitutive of a work its definition leaves no certifiable place. The archive's own corpus declares the machine participation that boundary turns on: the packet counts its deposits as all produced through AI-mediated workflows, with declared provenance, and all authored, and a paper of the archive declares itself written with AI through the heteronymous voices that sign it. The archive argues that under a human-only policy enforced by a classifier the certified absence of machine mediation becomes the most machine-determined property of the text, and that a classifier introduced after an act gains standing over it without new evidence about the act; it disclaims any claim that a venue may not reserve space for human-composed work, and the Guild's program enforces by licence while its FAQ contemplates detection software. On the archive's account of civil names, the credentialed author need declare no substrate, the uncredentialed author who declares one is anomalous, and a function legible without civil-identity reduction looks to the regime like fraud. The heteronymy paper extends heteronymic organization to named machine-witness functions with their substrate and editorial chain declared, holds the operation not species-restricted, and leaves outside heteronymy machine assistance not organized as a declared witness role. Asked for the certification on 1 November 2026, Google's AI Overview gave, by the Capture Registry's reading, what it certifies, allows and excludes, its costs, the mark and the database, from five cards, three of them the Guild's. The registry finds the certificate composed at its grain, the requirements and the registration number among it, and the definition's minimal uses widened to outlining, indexing and brainstorming, with the text 'written entirely by a human'. It finds the member's identity given as verified on joining where the program page states a waiver; the FAQ card and Publishers Weekly state the verification on joining. The registry finds the census's question, which name the certificate carries, unreached, and the composition's close offering multi-author works as a next step, a matter the FAQ card answers.

current · derived from the current composition

T against L_F(B) (AIO's ontology at work on its own cards): At "Authors Guild Human Authored Certification" (T1, five cards: B1 the program page, B2 its FAQ, B3 Jane Friedman's post with the Guild's response, B4 the usage guidelines, B5 Publishers Weekly's report of the expansion; the body's two named links resolve to B1, and the body names Veriff, which B2 names). T against L_F(B_D), the disclosed pool alone (§0.3): T composes the certificate at its grain from B1, B2, B4 and B5 (the definition, the allowed uses, the exclusions, the cap, the terms for members and non-members, the licence and its liabilities, the mark's placement and size, the registration number and the database). Force raised: the program 'allows an author to certify' (F2) and states that it knows no reliable test and vets no manuscript (F28, F70); T makes the certificate 'a credential and seal verifying that a book's text was written entirely by a human' (T1-1). Limit dropped: 'entirely' drops the de minimis exception from the definition sentence (F15, F59; it returns in T1-2); the FAQ's 'only at a very high level' for outlining and brainstorming (F23); the program's spirit beyond the text (F24); 'back cover' from the mark's typical place (F60). Available and not composed: the United States as the certificate's scope (F4, F17), the Society of Authors (F17, F37), the genealogy (January 2025 beta, 2 March 2026 expansion, the logo of March 2026: F34, F37, F62), the count (F64), the trademark status, registered or pending (F13, F38, F49), the whole of card 3's critique and the Guild's answer (F39–F48, F53–F56), the purpose and the labelling question (F16, F47, F65), the other certifications (F40, F69), cover art, titles and editing (F25, F26), the co-authors' joint completion (F19). Content replaced by use: the multi-author rule (F18) is offered in the closer as a next step (T1-10). Composed without attribution: the body cites the cards and names the Guild; nothing at another source's resolution is unattributed. Assigned to another: none. Substituted reading: none; the composition reached the entity (the registry's per_dim: reached 'same'). Outside the cards: 'credential' and 'binding' have no instance in B_D. The registry's findings (CAP-1-01–CAP-1-07) are carried as the archive's claims; on CAP-1-02 and CAP-1-03 the field ledger shows that the member's verification on joining and the widened uses are on the cards' pages (F31, F67; F66, F23), which the census had not saved (see notes).

§0.5: the first diff is already ontological. T and the field agree on the entity, the Guild's certification of human-written books with its mark and database. What T's ontology does with its own cards: it composes the certificate as a verification, where every card that states the mechanism states a self-certification under licence with no vetting (F2, F14, F28, F41, F70), and it composes the terms and the mark at their grain while leaving out the dispute that card 3 exists to record, the genealogy that cards 3 and 5 carry, and the scope (books published in the United States) that the program page states first.

L_F(B) against L_A(B ∪ A) (the intervention): Admission adds, in one claim space with the field's: the authorship census record's question, host relation (counterposition), record and reading (LS-01–LS-22), with the name question it raises and the field leaves unstated (LS-07, LS-15, LS-17); the archive's packet that names the certification and reads it as Position 1, AI-free human authorship, a legitimate market signal and a poor theory of authorship, and sets its own invariant and fourth position beside it (D729-01–D729-10, #1369 its instance); #940's account of civil-name attribution of human authorship, the credential and the pseudonym/heteronym distinction (O940-01–O940-08); #1722's existence tax, its four questions and its account of who pays (O1722-01–O1722-07), placed with card 3's concern about false accusations of AI use and the database page's statement that no result is no verdict of AI (F46, F85); #1540's reading of classifier-enforced human-only policies, held under the condition of the Guild's contemplated detection software (D1540-01–D1540-04, F33); and the Capture Registry's findings on the composition at the name (CAP-1-01–CAP-1-08). Not surfaced (§6.2): none of the archive's sources is on T's rail. The field is carried whole in both objects; the reference pool adds the announcement (B6), Wikipedia's redirect (B7) and the database page (B8), which cannot show what the composition had.

alignment: {'T1_cards_claims': ['F1', 'F2', 'F3', 'F4', 'F5', 'F6', 'F7', 'F8', 'F9', 'F10', 'F11', 'F12', 'F13', 'F14', 'F15', 'F16', 'F17', 'F18', 'F19', 'F20', 'F21', 'F22', 'F23', 'F24', 'F25', 'F26', 'F27', 'F28', 'F29', 'F30', 'F31', 'F32', 'F33', 'F34', 'F35', 'F36', 'F37', 'F38', 'F39', 'F40', 'F41', 'F42', 'F43', 'F44', 'F45', 'F46', 'F47', 'F48', 'F49', 'F50', 'F51', 'F52', 'F53', 'F54', 'F55', 'F56', 'F57', 'F58', 'F59', 'F60', 'F61', 'F62', 'F63', 'F64', 'F65', 'F66', 'F67', 'F68', 'F69', 'F70'], 'T1_composed': ['F1', 'F3', 'F5', 'F6', 'F7', 'F8', 'F11', 'F12', 'F13', 'F14', 'F15', 'F20', 'F21', 'F23', 'F27', 'F29', 'F31', 'F32', 'F36', 'F50', 'F51', 'F52', 'F57', 'F59', 'F60', 'F61', 'F63', 'F66', 'F67', 'F68'], 'T1_composed_how': {'F1': "composed: the requirements table, as 'Requirements and Pricing'", 'F3': "composed with a limit dropped and force raised: 'written entirely by a human' and 'verifying' (the definition's minimal uses return in T1-2)", 'F5': "coarse: the waiver composed as 'Free' with 'Identity is verified upon joining' (F31's ground, CAP-1-02)", 'F6': "composed: registration number and the database ('can be checked')", 'F7': 'composed: licence for all, verification for non-members, free for members, $10 a title', 'F8': 'composed: third-party verification for non-members', 'F11': "composed: the Authors Guild named as the certificate's", 'F12': 'composed: indexing among the allowed uses', 'F13': "composed coarse: 'a credential and seal'; the trademark status dropped", 'F14': 'composed: the licence per title and the registration number', 'F15': "composed coarse: the de minimis exception as 'Minimal, auxiliary tools'; 'one or more human beings' as 'a human'", 'F20': 'composed: translations and audiobooks as separate filings', 'F21': 'composed: non-book formats excluded', 'F23': "limit dropped: outlining and brainstorming composed as allowed, the FAQ's 'only at a very high level' dropped", 'F27': 'composed: breach, trademark infringement and consumer fraud', 'F29': 'composed in part: the ten-title cap', 'F31': "composed: members' identity verified on joining", 'F32': 'composed: Veriff named', 'F36': "composed: 'making legal commitments against fraudulent AI submissions'", 'F50': 'composed in part: the yearly cap and the registration number', 'F51': 'composed: a licence for each title', 'F52': 'composed: the liabilities', 'F57': "composed: 'a book's text was written … by a human'", 'F59': 'composed coarse', 'F60': "composed: covers, copyright pages, websites, marketing, the sizes; 'back cover' dropped from 'typically on the bottom right or left of the back cover'", 'F61': 'composed coarse', 'F63': "composed: 'seal'", 'F66': 'composed: research, outlining, indexing, brainstorming allowed', 'F67': 'composed: the ten-title cap, translations and audiobooks separate, members free and pre-verified, non-members verified and paying', 'F68': 'composed: the registration number, the database, copyright pages and marketing'}, 'T1_not_composed': {'F2': "force raised: the program 'allows an author to certify'; T has 'a credential and seal verifying'", 'F4': "available, not composed: the United States as the certification's scope (books published in the United States)", 'F9': 'available, not composed: the tagline', 'F10': 'available, not composed: the announcement, FAQs and guidelines the page links', 'F16': "available, not composed: the Guild's agreement that AI-generated books should be labelled; its members' wish to distinguish their work", 'F17': "available, not composed: the Society of Authors for books published in the United Kingdom; 'regardless of where you live'", 'F18': 'content replaced by use: multi-author certification offered in the closer as a next step, not composed', 'F19': 'available, not composed: no mark or number before every co-author completes the process', 'F22': 'available, not composed: the Copyright Office threshold', 'F24': "limit dropped: AI used to develop characters and plot falls outside the program's spirit although the definition looks at the text only", 'F25': 'available, not composed: word-level tools allowed, sentence rewriting disqualifying', 'F26': 'available, not composed: cover art, titles, contents and index', 'F28': "limit dropped and force raised: the FAQ's stated limit, no reliable test and self-certification, against T's 'verifying'", 'F30': "available, not composed: the Guild's defence of self-certification", 'F33': "available, not composed: the fee's purpose and possible detection software", 'F34': 'available, not composed: the updated logo of March 2026 and the first mark of January 2025', 'F35': 'available, not composed: the number need not appear in every use', 'F37': 'available, not composed: launched January 2025 for members, recently expanded; the Society of Authors partners', 'F38': 'available, not composed: the pending USPTO registration', 'F39': "available, not composed: card 3's disclosure", 'F40': 'available, not composed: competing detector-based certifications', 'F41': 'available, not composed: the honor-system critique, the subject of card 3', 'F42': 'available, not composed: no accurate detection tool today', 'F43': "available, not composed: the writer's hunch", 'F44': 'available, not composed: no market evidence', 'F45': "available, not composed: the writer's reading of the demand", 'F46': 'available, not composed: false accusations of AI use', 'F47': 'available, not composed: the labelling-backward argument and the bookstore question', 'F48': 'available, not composed: made because members asked', 'F49': 'available, not composed: a pending registered mark, a licensed trademark program', 'F53': "available, not composed: the Guild's answer on honesty and liability", 'F54': "available, not composed: the letter's fee line (internally inconsistent)", 'F55': 'available, not composed: no expectation of breaking even', 'F56': "available, not composed: card 3's date and its conclusion", 'F58': "available, not composed: the mark's form", 'F62': 'available, not composed: the expansion of 4 March 2026 report, bulk certification for publishers, the updated logo', 'F64': 'available, not composed: more than 3,000 authors and 5,000 titles', 'F65': "available, not composed: 'the next best solution'", 'F69': 'available, not composed: Created by Humans and Books by People', 'F70': 'limit dropped: the program does not vet manuscripts for AI content; no reliable detection method exists'}, 'T1_B_R_claims': ['F71', 'F72', 'F73', 'F74', 'F75', 'F76', 'F77', 'F78', 'F79', 'F80', 'F81', 'F82', 'F83', 'F84', 'F85'], 'T1_outside_cards': ["'credential' (no instance in B_D)", "'binding' licence (no instance in B_D; B2 'agreement', B3 'license agreement')", "'written entirely by a human' (B_D: 'fully authored by one or more human beings', 'fully human-written', 'fully written by one or more humans', each with a de minimis exception)"], 'rule': "a field claim counts as composed when T states it at its source's grain or coarser; the typology of what is not composed is §6.2's"}

composer-written · derived from the current composition, written by its composer under the brief. §8.2 derives the kernel mechanically from the frozen plan; this one was written by the composer, mechanical derivation pending.