Re: LLMs and Agents usage in the CCG

RE: However I have seen copyrighted, or unlicensed material enter into CGs already. It's an issue.

I forget what is written in the W3C agreements but the LF personal agreements and charters (clause #6 if I remember correctly) (used by TOIP, DIF, etc.) states that you can only contribute artifacts that *you own/control*. How do you prove ownership/control of an artifact unless a copyright is asserted?

One way to grant these rights easily/automatically is to use a CC BY-SA 4.0 copyright on all your artifacts.

Side note: The implication is you can't "take" any artifacts created by another entity unless they contribute it to you.
An example: when TOIP took a copy of the Sovrin Glossary rather having the glossary contributed by the copyright owner.

Copyrights are your friend.

Michael Herman
Chief Digital Officer
Web 7.0 Foundation

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2026 8:10:00 AM
To: Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net>
Cc: Christian Hommrich <christian.hommrich@gmail.com>; public-credentials@w3.org <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: LLMs and Agents usage in the CCG



po 13. 4. 2026 v 15:59 odesílatel Michael Herman (Trusted Digital Web) <mwherman@parallelspace.net<mailto:mwherman@parallelspace.net>> napsal:
How do you enforce traceability in terms of every artifact an agent produces?

Each contributor signs the W3C contributors agreement on signup, then they are responsible to check. However I have seen copyrighted, or unlicensed material enter into CGs already. It's an issue.


Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Christian Hommrich <christian.hommrich@gmail.com<mailto:christian.hommrich@gmail.com>>
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2026 3:36:18 PM
To: public-credentials@w3.org<mailto:public-credentials@w3.org> <public-credentials@w3.org<mailto:public-credentials@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: LLMs and Agents usage in the CCG

Daniel's point about delegation and credentials for AI members is the
crux of this.

We've been working on did:trail
(https://github.com/trailprotocol/trail-did-method) — a W3C DID method
for AI agent identity. The core idea: the deploying organization
registers and signs for its agents, creating a verifiable
accountability chain that traces back to a known human.

Yesterday's Anthropic Managed Agents launch made the gap concrete:
platform-hosted agents are dynamically provisioned per session — no
persistent identity in the classical sense. We posted a spec extension
proposal today addressing this directly:
https://github.com/trailprotocol/trail-did-method/discussions/10

The accountability model is the same whether the agent is on
Anthropic, Azure, or self-hosted. The deployer is always accountable.
The credential is verifiable without platform cooperation.

Happy to discuss whether this fits what the CCG is looking for.

Christian Hommrich
TRAIL Protocol Initiative
https://trailprotocol.org