Evidence Framework for AI in Creative Industries
"Not to prohibit AI, but to leave evidence"
— The problem is not AI itself, but its black-box nature
" AI is already widely used in content industries, and stopping its use is not realistic. What matters is leaving cryptographically undeniable records of "who," "what," "with what authority," and "when" assets were ingested, trained, generated, or exported — enabling post-hoc verification when disputes arise. "
Rights infringement. Confidential leaks. Personality violations. Deepfakes.
When disputes arise, how can you prove what happened in the AI workflow?
CAP provides the answer — a tamper-proof evidence trail for creative AI.
Structural challenges in AI-powered creative workflows
The rights basis of materials ingested into AI workflows is untraceable. When disputes arise, proving legitimate use becomes impossible.
Whether consent was obtained for training or generation is unclear. Voice cloning, likeness use, and style mimicry happen without proper authorization records.
Unreleased characters, story settings, and assets are ingested into AI without confidentiality classification, risking leaks through training data.
| Challenge | Description | CAP Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Rights Opacity | Rights basis of AI-ingested materials untraceable | RightsBasis field records rights foundation |
| Consent Ambiguity | Consent status for training/generation unclear | ConsentBasis fixes consent state cryptographically |
| Confidentiality Gap | Unreleased materials' sensitivity unmanaged | ConfidentialityLevel classifies sensitivity |
| Liability Uncertainty | Responsible parties unidentifiable in disputes | User/Role records executor identity |
| Tampering Risk | Post-hoc record alteration possible | Hash Chain provides cryptographic guarantee |
CAP application scope by industry priority
Games
AAA studios, publishers, outsourcing
Risk: IP dilution, confidential leaks, character mimicry
Film / Animation / Streaming
Production, VFX, post-production, OTT
Risk: Actor likeness, voice actor audio, unreleased footage
Publishing
Manga, books, editorial production
Risk: Style mimicry, manuscript leaks, translation quality
Music
Labels, streaming, MV production, rights management
Risk: Voice cloning, song mimicry, rights processing
Corporate Branding
Web, IR, financial reports, design
Risk: Tone mimicry, brand damage
Education / Training
Universities, research, corporate training
Risk: Paper plagiarism, unauthorized material training
Adult Content
Production, distribution, platforms
Risk: Deepfakes, non-consensual generation
Five categories of threats CAP addresses
Unique expression styles and worldviews easily mimicked by AI, diluting brand value and market differentiation.
Third parties use AI trained on your materials, producing market outputs similar to your products.
Unreleased characters, settings, footage, and code ingested into AI, leaking through training data.
Private images/videos used without consent for generation: defamation, sexual content, harassment.
Corporate HP/IR/financial report design and tone mimicked, creating outputs confused with official materials.
Four core events in the creative AI lifecycle
Code: 1 — Asset Ingestion
Records materials, data, and references input into AI workflows.
Required Fields:
Code: 2 — Model Training
Records model training, fine-tuning, and additional training activities.
Required Fields:
Code: 3 — Content Generation
Records AI-generated content creation.
Required Fields:
Code: 4 — External Output
Records generated content output, distribution, and delivery.
Required Fields:
Key field categories in CAP events
RightsBasis Enum
ConsentBasis Enum
ConfidentialityLevel Enum
Role Enum
{
"EventID": "01934f2a-8b3c-7f93-9f3a-1234567890ab",
"ChainID": "01934e3a-6a1b-7c82-9d1b-0987654321dc",
"Timestamp": "2025-12-27T10:00:00.000Z",
"EventType": "INGEST",
"Asset": {
"AssetID": "urn:cap:asset:studio-a:char-design-001",
"AssetType": "IMAGE",
"AssetHash": "sha256:a7ffc6f8bf1ed76651c14756a061d662..."
},
"Rights": {
"RightsBasis": "OWNED",
"ConsentBasis": "NOT_REQUIRED",
"PermittedUse": {
"Training": true,
"Generation": true,
"Distribution": false
}
},
"Confidentiality": {
"ConfidentialityLevel": "PRE_RELEASE",
"ReleaseDate": "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z"
},
"Context": {
"UserID": "user-12345",
"Role": "CREATOR"
}
}
Comply-or-Explain and Evidence-Based Accountability
CAP does not force compliance. It requires organizations to either comply or explain their reasons for deviation.
CAP enables not only proof of use, but also negative proof — demonstrating that specific assets were NOT used.
Key Benefits:
| Scenario | Without CAP | With CAP |
|---|---|---|
| Rights Infringement Allegation | Can only claim "we didn't use it" | INGEST logs prove use/non-use |
| Confidential Leak Investigation | Leak path identification difficult | EXPORT destination and timing traceable |
| Consent Verification | Vague verbal confirmation | ConsentBasis cryptographically recorded |
| Audit Response | Post-hoc record creation | Real-time Evidence Pack |
CAP's connection to global regulations
| Regulation | Jurisdiction | CAP Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| EU AI Act | EU | Art.12 Logging, Art.53 Transparency |
| Digital Services Act (DSA) | EU | Generative AI content disclosure |
| GDPR | EU | Processing records, consent management |
| Copyright Directive | EU | TDM exception, opt-out rights |
| Copyright Act Art. 30-4 | Japan | AI training exception provisions |
| AI Business Guidelines | Japan | Transparency, accountability requirements |
CAP's position in the framework hierarchy
| Aspect | VCP (Finance) | CAP (Content/Creative) |
|---|---|---|
| Subject | Transaction | Content/IP Asset |
| Target Industry | Finance, Trading | Games, Film, Publishing, Music |
| Core Events | SIG/ORD/EXE/CXL | INGEST/TRAIN/GEN/EXPORT |
| Regulatory Reference | MiFID II, EU AI Act | EU AI Act, DSA, Copyright Law |
| Timestamp Precision | Nanoseconds ~ Milliseconds | Seconds ~ Minutes |
| Common Foundation | VAP Integrity Layer (Hash Chain, Merkle Tree, Digital Signature) | |
Join the development of CAP and shape the future of AI governance in creative industries
"The question is not whether to use AI in creative work.
The question is whether you can prove what happened when disputes arise."
— VeritasChain Standards Organization
"Not to stop AI — but to leave evidence."
This work is licensed under CC BY 4.0 International