The future of creative attribution
is already being written.
Here's what we believe—and why it matters.
No context.
Who made this?
An AI? A person? Both?
The creative vision is invisible.
An image exists. It circulates. It gets saved, shared, remixed. The intent behind it—the hours of prompt refinement, the artistic vision, the specific creative choices—all of it vanishes the moment the file leaves the generator.
intent: "Album cover exploring solitude in digital spaces"
tool: midjourney/6.1
created: 2026-01-15
expires: 2031-01-15
The same image, but now it carries its own context. The creator's intent is visible. The tool is acknowledged. The work speaks for itself—not just aesthetically, but attributionally.
The prompt is the creative act. The one who directs creation holds creative claim. We don't need to resolve "is AI art real art?" We need to surface the intent behind it.
Used in an ad campaign.
Creator gets nothing—
not even recognition.
Legal gray zone.
A company uses an AI-generated image in their marketing. The creator—if we can even use that word—is unknown. There's no attribution, no acknowledgment, no way to trace the creative origin. Enforcement would require lawyers, courts, jurisdiction, money, time.
status: ATTESTED
creator: @designer.eth
license: CC-BY-4.0
// Social proof of attribution
The platform displays the attestation badge. The creator's profile is linked. Users can see the attribution at a glance. No lawyers required—just visibility. Social pressure does the rest.
Courts require lawyers, jurisdiction, money, time. Respect requires only visibility. When platforms surface attribution, social pressure does what legal enforcement never could—at internet scale.
Remixed, reuploaded,
stripped of context.
Creator loses control
the moment they share.
An AI-generated track is released. It gets remixed, sampled, reuploaded. The creator's connection to the work becomes tenuous, then invisible. The internet never forgets—even when you wish it would.
expires: 2031-01-15
revocable: true
// Creator can revoke anytime
// The work carries its own limits
The attestation expires in 2031. The creator can revoke anytime. The work carries its own memory—and its own limits. Attribution is not a life sentence.
Nothing is permanent without renewal. We build for memory, not surveillance. Creators can change their minds. That's not a bug—it's a right.
its own attribution system.
Walled gardens.
Incompatible formats.
Fragmentation.
Midjourney has one system. DALL-E has another. Stable Diffusion communities invent their own. None of them talk to each other. Attribution becomes platform-dependent—which means it's not really attribution at all.
// One protocol
// Embedded in the file
// Works everywhere
tool: stable-diffusion/xl
One protocol. Embedded in the file itself. Works with Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, DALL-E, your own fine-tuned model. The attestation travels with the work, not the platform.
QR codes were invented in 1994. Denso Wave gave them away—no licensing fees, no control. If they'd charged, we'd have 50 incompatible formats. ARR charges nothing. Belongs to everyone. That's the only way standards win.
AI detection tools.
"Did you write this
or did ChatGPT?"
Gatekeeping dressed
as authenticity.
Every piece of writing is suspect. Detection tools proliferate—and fail. The question "did AI write this?" becomes a weapon, not a query. Authenticity becomes a gatekeeping mechanism.
status: ATTESTED — valid
// No attestation?
status: NONE — also valid
// The choice belongs to the creator.
Both are valid. The choice to attest—or not—belongs to the creator alone. Platforms that require ARR for access violate everything we stand for.
ARR is an invitation, never a requirement. Any platform that mandates ARR for access violates everything we stand for. Absence is not guilt. Silence is not confession.
This is not a product.
This is not a company.
This is a thesis—implemented as infrastructure.
The moment will arrive. The protocol will be ready.