Advertising and platform revenue
YouTube, Spotify, Substack, TikTok, Patreon — whatever the platform pays you for a piece built on this material is yours entirely.
Everything in the record is licensed for reuse, including commercially. Make what you want from it, put it wherever you want, monetize it however you like, and keep the money. The only thing asked in return is a link back — because a link is what lets the next person check the claim.
The written record on this site — the entity graph, the source records, Origins, Selma, the argument pages — is released under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
In plain terms: copy it, quote it, translate it, remix it, cut it into a video, read it aloud, build a course from it, print it in a book. Commercially or otherwise. No permission needed and no royalty owed.
A record that cannot be reused cannot be checked, and a record that cannot be checked is worth nothing. Every restriction that would protect the material from misuse would also stop the journalist, the podcaster and the graduate student who are the point of publishing it.
This is stated explicitly because most sites do not say it and creators reasonably assume otherwise.
YouTube, Spotify, Substack, TikTok, Patreon — whatever the platform pays you for a piece built on this material is yours entirely.
Affiliate links in your own derivative work are yours. No revenue share, no reporting, no approval step.
If a brand sponsors your explainer series, or a publication commissions the piece, that is between you and them.
The intent, as Exchange Networks come online, is that creators working from this record can draw on hosting, tooling and distribution from the network rather than paying for them separately — with a share retained against those costs and the rest staying with the creator.
Nothing about that is required to start, and nothing here is contingent on it. The license above stands on its own today. This paragraph is a statement of direction, not an offer.
A piece that brings people into the record is an attributable contribution to the graph — Publicity Premium for doing it publicly, Cascade Premium for whoever it brings in after you. Recorded now, valued retrospectively as outcomes verify. That is in addition to whatever you earn from it directly, not instead of it.
There is an enormous amount of content on the internet built from invented detail, because invented detail is cheap and verifiable detail is expensive. This record is the opposite trade: every account here is published with its provenance, its date, and the name of whoever gave it.
Which means a piece built from it can do something most content cannot — be checked, and survive being checked.
The material deserves better treatment than he can give it, and the people best placed to give it that treatment are not going to ask permission first. So: permission is granted in advance, the money is yours, and the only thing requested is the link that lets someone check you.
Making something from this record enrolls you — and enrolls the people who open what you make — into a Personal Privacy Network held inside a Quantum Privacy Cell. That is how contribution becomes attributable and how the earnings above can settle to you, so it is stated in full here rather than buried in a policy.
The enrollment is real but deliberately unobtrusive. It creates no account to manage, changes nothing about how you or your audience use any other service, and can be switched off at any time.
Publishing a derivative work generates an EasyAccess Link — requested from the address below, or generated with the Builder when it opens. Distribute it through whatever channel you already use: a video description, a newsletter, a post, an embedded interface, a QR code.
Following an EasyAccess Link is itself Hareisation. The interaction activates an existing Personal Privacy Network or instantiates a new one on demand inside an associated Quantum Privacy Cell.
Nothing about the experience changes. No account is created that anyone has to manage, no re-authentication is required, and no personal data moves. What changes is that the interaction is now attributable — which is what allows the person who made the thing to be paid for having made it.
Drawn from the model consent language in the corpus, and stated plainly:
You authorize a Personal Privacy Network to help securely verify identity and authorize access to apps, data, secure messages, accounts, digital content and online services. It operates under your control and for your benefit, and may act on your behalf to improve convenience, security and personalization. It is designed to protect your information and reduce unnecessary data sharing, and it does not disclose personally identifiable information to anyone without your permission.
EasyAccess integrations are asynchronous, additive and fail-safe. Nothing you or your audience does depends on the network being available — if it is slow or offline, the only thing deferred is the attribution, and everything else works exactly as it did before.
Every other content platform on the internet asks you to accept terms so that it can monetize your attention. This asks you to accept an authorization so that you can hold what you make and be paid when it is reused — and so that the person who opened your work holds the same thing.
That is the whole architecture applied to the smallest possible case, and it is the reason this record is licensed for reuse in the first place.
CC BY 4.0 requires attribution. This is what satisfies it.
Source: Consilient Network (consilient.network), CC BY 4.0. Where you are drawing on a specific account, name the source record — for example source record S-005 — so a reader can go straight to it.
A spoken credit and a link in the description is enough: material from consilient.network, used under Creative Commons Attribution. If you are quoting an account directly, saying whose account it is does more for you than for us — it is the thing that makes the claim credible.
Say that you did. You are free to adapt, condense, translate or reframe; the license only asks that you do not present a modification as the original. And if your adaptation surfaces an error in ours, send it — corrections are recorded and attributed like anything else.
Three categories are outside the license, and each for a different reason.
The filings are patents. They are published so they can be read and examined; the license on this record does not grant any patent right. Separately, the architecture is openly licensed — see the portfolio page for what that means.
Photographs, articles and documents by other people — including the 1965 Selma photographs, which are Milton Hare's, and the journalism linked from that page. Their rights are theirs. Link to them rather than reproducing them.
Where a contributor claims their edge and adds their own account, they hold their own rights and set their own terms. The graph records who said what; it does not take ownership of it.
Consilient Network, Quantum Privacy Network and the associated marks are not licensed by CC BY. Use them to refer to the thing — that is what names are for — but not in a way that implies your work is published or endorsed by the network.
If you are looking for something to make and want it to matter.
Four men, a two-seat car, 2,300 miles, and photographs that sat in a box for forty years. It has a beginning, a middle and an end, and the CNN documentary already exists to point at.
Open →Most checkableThirty-odd people and organizations, each with an account and each with the gaps marked. Pick one, call them, and make the piece nobody else can make.
Open →Most arguableThe industry's own stated failures, and a proposed mechanism. Whether it holds is a genuinely open question — which is what makes it worth an explainer.
Open →Send what you made to evidence@qpncatalyst.io. Not for approval — you do not need it — but so the work enters the graph attributed to you, with a timestamp, as your own independent record.