The future of audio is being shaped right now by technologists, regulators, and corporations. We publish deep research, structural frameworks, and regulatory interventions to ensure human creators remain at the center of that future.
How do we ensure that independent podcasters have the same voice as major tech platforms? We built equal representation into our DNA. This framework details our three-chamber governance model, anti-capture safeguards, royalty-free patent policy, and the modular certification architecture that makes BC-Certified work.
March 31, 2026AI models shouldn't train on stolen voices. This paper outlines the technical and legal requirements for establishing an ethical, opt-in market for audio training data. It covers the $22.6 billion AI data market, why independent audio is the most valuable and least protected segment, the legal landscape from the NO FAKES Act to the EU AI Act, what "clean audio data" actually means, and why a member-owned cooperative is the right structure to build it.
September 2026Generative AI isn't just changing how audio is made; it's changing who gets paid to make it. Employment has always been the mechanism that enforces the social contract: it gives people identity, structure, and a stake in the system. This paper argues that credentialing can replace employment as that enforcement mechanism, and uses agent-based simulation to show when and how the inversion happens.
April 2026AI data scraping doesn't stop at international borders, and neither does our advocacy. We filed this response to Singapore's IMDA to ensure their highly influential governance framework includes strict protections for audio content provenance and creator consent. Our first international filing.
April 1, 2026When California proposed new privacy rules for AI, we intervened to ensure creators weren't left out. This filing addresses the gap in AB 566: who verifies that AI systems actually respect opt-out signals? We argued for independent third-party certification as a scalable compliance pathway.
April 1, 2026How the government buys AI dictates how companies build AI. We submitted this comment to the Federal Acquisition Regulation council addressing the gap in AI hardware provenance verification, recommending voluntary third-party verification as a practical complement to the existing self-certification standard.
April 1, 2026The Federal Reserve proposed eliminating "reputation risk" from bank supervision. We supported the change and argued that objective, standards-based credentialing should replace subjective assessments, especially for community banks and minority-owned institutions that have been disproportionately affected.
April 1, 2026The federal government is actively writing the technical standards for safe AI. We submitted this blueprint to NIST detailing how regulators can mandate audio data transparency, track dataset provenance, and protect creator rights within their evaluation framework.
March 2026NIST's cybersecurity center asked how identification and authorization should work for AI agents. We argued that an agent's identity is incomplete without verified behavioral safety credentials, and proposed integrating safety certification directly into the authorization process.
March 14, 2026Our founding public comment. We told NIST that AI safety must include economic safety for creators. This filing argues that behavioral safety is a distinct security domain that existing frameworks miss entirely, backed by federal court rulings, the insurance industry's retreat from AI coverage, and state legislative mandates.
March 6, 2026Tech platforms have organized to extract the value of our audio. It is time we organize to protect it. Add your name to the movement.