Contributed manifests were in no declared condition at all, which left §9a
replication with no grant flowing through it: peers mirror each other's
catalogues wholesale, and every hop of that was unlicensed.
CC0 rather than a share-alike licence, because a share-alike works by asserting
a right in the data and then conditioning its use. The position in
docs/legal-posture.md §3 is that presence timings are facts rather than
protectable expression — asserting copyright in them in order to license them
would contradict that argument in the same repository, and that contradiction is
worth more to an opponent than the licence is worth to us. CC0 also waives the
sui generis database right by name, closing the EU-specific residual exposure
from the contributor's side.
The grant is taken at token issuance, and that is not incidental. There are no
accounts, so there is no sign-up to attach terms to, and a manifest arrives over
POST /manifests with no channel to negotiate over. Acquiring the contribute
capability is the only moment a grant can be made, so POST /tokens now returns
the licence and its terms alongside the token — a licence the server publishes
but never delivers is one no contributor agreed to.
The test pins the scope limit as well as the identifier. Bounding the grant to
the manifest is the half that can fail silently: a reworded term reading onto
the underlying work would purport to grant what no contributor can.
Also records the settled code-licence position across all four repositories in
the legal posture, correcting an earlier claim there that the plugin and
extraction repos declared nothing. Both already carried LICENSE files.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
TRACES: UR-019 | PR-006
Removes `cut.video_hash` and the `exact` match tier on legal grounds. The
OpenSubtitles hash was the strongest technical signal available — it identifies
a specific file, so it cannot produce a false positive — and that is exactly
the problem.
Every tier must be a claim about a *cut*, never about a copy. A TMDB id
discloses "some copy of this film", which is what a library catalogue
discloses. A file hash discloses "this exact release": it made a read endpoint
into a release-level oracle, and made an instance's database a mapping from
file fingerprints to the instances holding them. That is a far more specific
disclosure than PR-005 permits, and a dataset no volunteer operator should be
asked to hold. The audio signature is the replacement: derived from content, it
identifies the cut rather than the copy, so two encodes of the same edit agree.
The field is deleted rather than kept as a vestigial null, on the same
reasoning §2 applied to `anneal_sec` — a key naming a signal the format no
longer has is actively misleading — so an upload carrying one is now an
unknown-field 400, with a test asserting it.
**Every content_id changes**, including for manifests that never carried a
hash, because the canonical `cut` object lost a key. The golden vector is
regenerated and re-verified against an independent Python implementation; the
plugin and extraction repos must adopt the new value or federation
deduplication silently breaks. Free now, pre-release; not free later.
Adds docs/legal-posture.md, the operator-facing half of what §5a asks for:
what an instance holds exhaustively, what it structurally cannot do, and how
that sits against the intermediary-liability regimes that plausibly apply.
208 tests. Coverage 25/32.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
TRACES: UR-011 | SR-004, PR-005
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5