Scope & Legal Positioning
This section defines the precise legal positioning of TrackForge's tiered certification system. It is intended for solicitors, barristers, and in-house counsel who need to understand what a TrackForge certification constitutes and, critically, what it does not.
Why legal teams use certification
TrackForge certification is designed to reduce ambiguity in disputes and transactions by providing a defensible, time-stamped record of metadata state and verification process. Legal teams typically use it to:
- Establish the diligence record behind metadata claims.
- Provide a repeatable evidence package for counterparties.
- Reduce uncertainty in acquisition or licensing negotiations.
The core distinction: process fidelity, not legal truth
TrackForge certifies process fidelity. This is the single most important concept in evaluating a TrackForge certification. Every certification attests that a defined, documented, repeatable verification process was followed and that the metadata was in the stated condition at the stated time. It does not attest to the absolute legal accuracy of the underlying data.
The depth of that process varies by certification tier. A Gold certification reflects multi-source corroboration with human review. A Declared certification reflects only that the submitting party's data was cryptographically timestamped. The process fidelity claim is scaled accordingly.
What TrackForge certifies
Each certification confirms the following elements, with the scope varying by tier:
- Documented multi-source enrichment — The track metadata was processed through TrackForge's enrichment pipeline, consulting multiple authoritative sources (Spotify, MusicBrainz, Discogs, Last.fm, PRS for Music, MLC, and additional collecting societies). (Gold, Silver, Bronze only — not applicable to Declared.)
- Cross-source validation — Validation was performed across these sources. Where sources disagreed, conflicts were identified, scored by confidence, and resolved either algorithmically or by a human operator. (Gold, Silver, Bronze only.)
- Quality gates passed — The metadata met all defined quality thresholds required for the assigned tier (see Certification Tiers for tier-specific requirements).
- Operator review — A trained operator reviewed and approved the certified data. The operator's actions are recorded in a comprehensive audit trail. (Gold tier only.)
- Point-in-time attestation — The certified metadata was in the stated condition at the stated time. The certification is a snapshot, not a continuing representation. (All tiers.)
- Cryptographic verifiability — The certification hash is independently verifiable against a blockchain anchor via OpenTimestamps. Any party can confirm that the data has not been altered since the certification date. (All tiers.)
- Methodology compliance — The published certification methodology (versioned and publicly available) was followed throughout the process. (All tiers.)
- Tier assignment — The track was classified according to the documented tier criteria, and the assigned tier accurately reflects the verification depth applied. (All tiers.)
Certification scope: composition rights
TrackForge certification currently covers composition rights (publishing and songwriting). The certification process verifies metadata critical to the collection of mechanical and performance royalties through composition-side collecting societies (PRS, GEMA, SACEM, MLC, APRA AMCOS, and their reciprocal partners).
Neighbouring rights (sound recording performance rights administered by PPL, GVL, SoundExchange, SCPP, PPCA, and similar organisations) are not included in the certification grade. Neighbouring rights registration status is assessed on an advisory basis where data is available, but is not verified to certification standard. Advisory neighbouring rights assessments are clearly labelled as such in all TrackForge outputs.
This scope limitation exists because automated verification of neighbouring rights registration currently requires direct access to PPL, GVL, SoundExchange, and SCPP repertoire databases, which do not offer the public or programmatic access necessary for independent verification at scale. TrackForge intends to extend certification scope to include neighbouring rights as these data sources become available.
For catalogue owners who hold both publishing and master rights (common among independent labels), the advisory neighbouring rights assessment provides an estimate of additional revenue opportunity beyond the certified composition rights analysis.
What TrackForge does NOT certify
TrackForge certification does not assert any of the following:
- Legal ownership — Certification does not confirm, establish, or imply legal ownership of copyright, neighbouring rights, or any other intellectual property right.
- Neighbouring rights registration — Certification does not verify or assess registration with sound recording CMOs (PPL, GVL, SoundExchange, SCPP, PPCA). Where neighbouring rights data appears in TrackForge outputs, it is advisory only and clearly labelled as such.
- Definitive writer splits — Certification does not assert that writer shares are legally settled, binding, or free from dispute.
- Absence of future contradictions — Certification does not guarantee that no future claim, correction, or contradictory evidence could emerge.
- Upstream accuracy — Certification does not warrant that the source databases consulted (Spotify, MusicBrainz, PRS, MLC, and others) are free from errors or omissions.
- Legal advice — Certification does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion of any kind.
- Substitute for title search — Certification is not a substitute for a formal title search, legal due diligence, or independent legal counsel.
TrackForge certification confirms the metadata state verified by TrackForge's multi-source enrichment pipeline and quality gates as of the date shown. It does not constitute legal proof of copyright ownership, authorship rights, or entitlement to royalties. TrackForge certifies process fidelity — that the stated methodology was followed and that the data was in this state at this time — not the absolute legal accuracy of the underlying metadata. This certification should not be relied upon as a substitute for independent legal advice or formal title searches.
Evidentiary weight by certification tier
The certification tier directly affects the evidentiary weight that may reasonably be attributed to a certification. Legal practitioners should consider the tier when assessing the probative value of a TrackForge certification.
| Tier | Process depth | Human involvement | Evidentiary considerations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gold | Multi-source enrichment, cross-referencing, share validation, 2+ source corroboration | Trained operator reviewed and approved; full audit trail | Highest evidentiary weight. Combines automated verification with documented human scrutiny. Analogous to an independent auditor's report. |
| Silver | Multi-source enrichment, cross-referencing, quality gates | Automated pipeline; no dedicated human review of individual tracks | Strong automated verification. Structurally complete metadata verified against authoritative sources. Analogous to an automated compliance check against defined criteria. |
| Bronze | Partial enrichment; documented gaps | Automated pipeline only | Partial verification with transparent gap documentation. The certification honestly reflects what is known and what is missing. Useful as evidence of due diligence effort, but gaps should be noted. |
| Declared | No independent verification by TrackForge | None — user-submitted data only | Lowest evidentiary weight as verification evidence. Value lies in the cryptographic timestamp proving the data was declared at a specific point in time. Analogous to a notarised declaration — it proves the declaration was made, not that the declaration is accurate. |
Tier-specific legal disclaimers
Each tier carries a distinct legal disclaimer that reflects its verification depth. These disclaimers are embedded in the certificate at issuance and cannot be altered. See Certificate Wording & Disclaimer for the full text of each disclaimer.
- Gold and Silver certificates carry the B2B verification disclaimer, with Gold additionally noting human operator review.
- Bronze certificates carry a modified verification disclaimer that explicitly identifies documented gaps.
- Declared certificates carry a materially different disclaimer making clear that TrackForge has not independently verified the metadata.
Analogies for legal practitioners
Two analogies assist in positioning TrackForge certification within familiar legal frameworks.
Title insurance
In property conveyancing, a title insurer conducts a thorough search of land registry records, historical deeds, and encumbrances. The resulting policy attests: "We searched thoroughly using a documented process and found no issues." It does not assert: "There are definitively no issues anywhere in the world."
TrackForge certification operates on the same principle. If a previously unknown rights claimant surfaces after certification, the certification remains a valid record of what was known and verified at that point in time, using the methodology then in force.
The tier determines the depth of the search: Gold represents a comprehensive search with human verification; Bronze represents a partial search with documented gaps; Declared represents only the owner's own declaration.
Credit rating agencies
Moody's or S&P rate a bond based on documented criteria applied consistently. The rating reflects their assessment methodology, not an absolute guarantee of creditworthiness. Similarly, TrackForge certifies metadata based on a published methodology applied consistently. The certification reflects process fidelity, not an absolute guarantee of metadata accuracy.
The tier is analogous to the rating grade itself — it communicates the depth and rigour of the assessment process applied.
In both cases, the value lies in the documented, repeatable, independently verifiable process rather than a claim of infallibility.
B2B vs Self-Service certification
TrackForge offers certification at different service tiers. The level of human involvement differs materially between them, and this distinction is relevant when assessing the evidentiary weight of a certification.
| Aspect | B2B Certification (Tier 2/3) | Self-Service (Tier 1, future) |
|---|---|---|
| Analogy | Independent auditor | Notary public |
| Certification tiers available | Gold, Silver, Bronze | Bronze, Declared |
| Human review | Trained operator reviews and approves each track (Gold tier) | Automated pipeline only |
| Conflict resolution | Operator reviews ambiguous conflicts with full audit trail | Algorithmic resolution only |
| Attestation strength | Process fidelity + human verification (Gold) or automated verification (Silver/Bronze) | Process fidelity only (timestamp attestation) |
| Use case | Catalogue acquisitions, dispute evidence, sync licensing, insurance | Internal catalogue monitoring, ongoing QA |
| Appropriate for | Legal proceedings, due diligence, commercial transactions | Internal confidence scoring, trend analysis |
For B2B engagements, TrackForge operates as an auditor: a qualified operator examines the evidence, makes documented decisions, and approves the result. The full operator audit trail — recording every action, decision, and review — is included in the certification proof bundle.
For self-service (when available), TrackForge operates as a notary: it attests that a defined automated process was followed and records the result with a blockchain-anchored timestamp, but does not apply independent human evaluation.
Both service levels produce cryptographically verifiable, blockchain-anchored certifications. The distinction lies in the depth of human scrutiny applied before certification, which may be relevant when assessing the weight to be given to the certification in any particular context.
Rating independence and the Chinese Wall
TrackForge may provide both enrichment services (modifying catalogue data for a fee) and rating services (independently assessing catalogue health) to the same catalogue. This creates a potential conflict of interest. TrackForge addresses this through structural separation at three levels:
-
Application architecture — The Rating Oracle is a pure function with zero imports from enrichment or any write-capable module. It receives data and produces a deterministic verdict. There is no code path through which the rating can modify data or call an enrichment function.
-
Database access control — The rating engine connects to the database through a dedicated
rating_readerPostgreSQL role with SELECT-only permissions. INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE are explicitly denied at the database level. Even if application-level safeguards failed, PostgreSQL would reject any write operation. -
Transaction isolation — All rating queries execute within PostgreSQL read-only transactions, providing a third layer of protection.
Rating criteria are immutable constants applied identically to all catalogues — there is no per-client configuration of thresholds or modifiers. Every rating output includes a mandatory conflict-of-interest disclosure. The standard version is recorded on every rating, enabling independent re-verification.
For the full technical details and auditor verification steps, see Rating Independence.
Next step: evaluate reliance posture
If you are advising on a transaction or dispute, confirm the certification tier and disclaimer text early. We can provide a recommended reliance posture and evidence package for your matter.
Contact TrackForge