# XVI. Operating Protocol ### Part 16 — Dual-Entity Operating Protocol #### 1. Mission-Locked Alignment and Legal Separation 1.1 **Two entities; one mission; separate liabilities.** The Guild is sponsored and supported by two aligned, legally separate nonprofit entities: **GCRI Canada** and **GCRI US**. Each entity:\ 1.1.1 maintains its own governance, accounts, contracts, liabilities, records, and compliance posture;\ 1.1.2 may collaborate on shared public-good objectives under written protocols; and\ 1.1.3 shall not represent the other as agent, affiliate, or substitute unless explicitly authorized by a signed instrument recorded under this Charter. 1.2 **No implied agency.** Nothing in Guild participation, platform use, publications, or branding creates:\ 1.2.1 partnership, joint venture, or agency;\ 1.2.2 authority to bind the other entity; or\ 1.2.3 shared liability for acts, omissions, contracts, or representations. 1.3 **Scope election by record.** Each major workstream, release, dataset, benchmark, or public statement shall declare by record:\ 1.3.1 the issuing entity (Canada or US);\ 1.3.2 the applicable jurisdictional scope;\ 1.3.3 any cross-entity collaboration posture; and\ 1.3.4 the reliance bounds and handling class. 1.4 **Non-executing invariant preserved.** Both entities remain strictly within a governance, R\&D, measurement, and evidence tooling perimeter. Nothing in cross-entity cooperation permits regulated execution, operational dispatch, enforcement, or certification. *** #### 2. Contracting Authority and Financial Flows Boundary 2.1 **Who contracts.** A contract is valid only if executed by the entity that:\ 2.1.1 is named as contracting party;\ 2.1.2 has board-authorized signing authority; and\ 2.1.3 records the contract class and reference in the records system. 2.2 **No pass-through obligations by default.** Neither entity assumes, guarantees, or backstops obligations of the other unless:\ 2.2.1 expressly stated in a signed agreement; and\ 2.2.2 recorded as a designated act with clear scope and limits. 2.3 **Revenue segregation.** The entities shall maintain clean separation of:\ 2.3.1 platform revenues and enterprise agreements;\ 2.3.2 grants and restricted funding;\ 2.3.3 sponsorship and in-kind contributions; and\ 2.3.4 cost allocations and reimbursements. 2.4 **Cost sharing discipline.** Cross-entity cost sharing, secondments, or reimbursements require:\ 2.4.1 a written inter-entity agreement;\ 2.4.2 fair allocation logic (documented);\ 2.4.3 conflicts review where applicable; and\ 2.4.4 record entry sufficient for audit-grade traceability. 2.5 **No commingling.** Funds shall not be commingled. Shared services may exist only under explicit billing and separation controls. *** #### 3. Data Hosting, Sovereignty, and Cross-Border Posture 3.1 **Default: minimize cross-border movement.** The Guild’s doctrine favors:\ 3.1.1 data minimization;\ 3.1.2 locality-aware processing; and\ 3.1.3 separation of identity data from technical observatory data. 3.2 **Hosting election.** Each dataset, benchmark corpus, tenant deployment, or archive shall declare:\ 3.2.1 where it is hosted;\ 3.2.2 who controls access;\ 3.2.3 the lawful basis for processing; and\ 3.2.4 retention and deletion posture. 3.3 **Tenant and partner data.** Enterprise tenant data is governed by:\ 3.3.1 tenant isolation requirements;\ 3.3.2 least-privilege access;\ 3.3.3 auditable access logs;\ 3.3.4 explicit role-based handling classes; and\ 3.3.5 contractual use limitations. 3.4 **Cross-border constraints.** Any cross-border transfer or shared processing must:\ 3.4.1 identify the applicable legal regime(s);\ 3.4.2 state the transfer mechanism (where required);\ 3.4.3 apply minimization and redaction by default; and\ 3.4.4 preserve contestability and correctionability. 3.5 **Identity protection.** Where identity data exists (e.g., membership, COI, reviewer rosters), it shall:\ 3.5.1 be held in separate systems from observatory outputs where feasible;\ 3.5.2 be access-logged with a two-person integrity rule for sensitive unmasking; and\ 3.5.3 be disclosed only where lawful, necessary, and recorded. *** #### 4. Staffing, Appointments, and Governance Roles 4.1 **Employment line clarity.** Staff, contractors, and volunteers must be assigned to one entity at a time for:\ 4.1.1 payroll;\ 4.1.2 supervision;\ 4.1.3 workplace compliance; and\ 4.1.4 liability and insurance coverage. 4.2 **Role designation by record.** Key Guild roles (Chair, Vice Chair, Integrity Steward, Maintainers, Reviewers) shall have:\ 4.2.1 a written mandate;\ 4.2.2 handling class access boundaries;\ 4.2.3 conflict-of-interest requirements; and\ 4.2.4 appointment and removal recorded. 4.3 **Secondments and shared service roles.** Any cross-entity staffing arrangement requires:\ 4.3.1 a written secondment or services agreement;\ 4.3.2 clear reporting lines;\ 4.3.3 confidentiality and handling commitments; and\ 4.3.4 a record entry noting scope and duration. 4.4 **No implied authority in public representation.** Titles and role markers shall not be used to imply regulatory authority, certification power, or operational execution capability. *** #### 5. IP, Licensing, and Publication Authority 5.1 **Open-first posture.** Unless designated Controlled/Restricted by safety and handling rules, Guild outputs are intended to be:\ 5.1.1 open-source (code);\ 5.1.2 open documentation and education; and\ 5.1.3 public methods disclosure consistent with do-no-harm constraints. 5.2 **Inbound contribution hygiene.** Contributions require:\ 5.2.1 contributor attestations (authorship, licensing rights);\ 5.2.2 license compatibility checks;\ 5.2.3 provenance records; and\ 5.2.4 rejection of contributions with ambiguous ownership or unsafe disclosure. 5.3 **Publication authority.** Only authorized issuers may publish as Guild outputs. Each publication must specify:\ 5.3.1 issuing entity (Canada or US);\ 5.3.2 quality marking (if any);\ 5.3.3 handling class;\ 5.3.4 reliance bounds; and\ 5.3.5 correction path and supersession pointer. 5.4 **Quality marks are not certification.** “Guild-Reviewed,” “Lab-Validated,” “Benchmark-Ready,” or “Enterprise-Deployable” are internal quality markings, not certification, endorsement, or compliance determinations. 5.5 **Trademark and brand discipline.** Use of names, marks, and platform references must:\ 5.5.1 follow communications integrity rules;\ 5.5.2 prohibit misleading “approved by” claims; and\ 5.5.3 provide screenshot-resistant disclaimers where feasible. *** #### 6. Cross-Entity Dispute Handling and Non-Agency Enforcement 6.1 **Dispute types.** Cross-entity disputes may include:\ 6.1.1 attribution disputes;\ 6.1.2 scope and perimeter disputes;\ 6.1.3 data handling disputes; and\ 6.1.4 publication authority disputes. 6.2 **Resolution method.** Disputes shall be addressed through:\ 6.2.1 recorded issue statements;\ 6.2.2 integrity steward triage;\ 6.2.3 a time-bounded resolution attempt; and\ 6.2.4 correction/supersession entries if needed. 6.3 **Non-agency enforcement.** If one entity identifies misrepresentation or perimeter breach by the other’s affiliates or participants, it may:\ 6.3.1 issue a correction notice;\ 6.3.2 suspend use of marks within its control; and\ 6.3.3 restrict access to its systems—without asserting authority to bind the other entity. *** #### 7. Communications Integrity and Separation Language 7.1 **Mandatory separation statement.** Public materials must preserve clarity that:\ 7.1.1 GCRI Canada and GCRI US are separate legal entities;\ 7.1.2 neither acts as agent for the other; and\ 7.1.3 outputs carry explicit issuer identification. 7.2 **Cross-entity co-branding rules.** Joint publications are permitted only if:\ 7.2.1 each entity’s role is stated;\ 7.2.2 liability and perimeter notices are included; and\ 7.2.3 a single “issuer of record” is designated for recordkeeping and correction control. 7.3 **No escalation of reliance by marketing.** Communications shall not:\ 7.3.1 imply certification;\ 7.3.2 imply regulatory endorsement;\ 7.3.3 claim operational security services; or\ 7.3.4 suggest enforcement capability. 7.4 **Crisis communications posture.** Where public interest requires rapid correction, the Guild may publish:\ 7.4.1 time-stamped bulletins with uncertainty bounds;\ 7.4.2 handling class labels; and\ 7.4.3 explicit “subject to correction” language. --- # Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter: ``` GET https://docs.therisk.global/organization/cooperation/nexus-guilds/future-of-web/xvi.-operating-protocol.md?ask= ``` The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.