Where Council of AI takes part, and what each listing does not mean

Council of AI (CSOAI Ltd) takes part in standards bodies as a participant or member, publishes into open registries and archives, holds scholarly identifiers, and files comments with regulators. Each entry below links to the page that proves it, or names the dated mailbox record when that is the only evidence, and says in its own row what it does not prove. Participation is not endorsement, and a listing is not adoption. Every entry links to its evidence.

Machine-readable: /interop/memberships.json (schema csoai.memberships/0.1, as of 2026-09-22, unsigned — it says so in the file). Re-checked by scripts/memberships-check.mjs, which fails when any public evidence URL stops answering with our name.

Every entry, with what it proves and what it does not

States follow the evidence. VERIFIED means the public URL answered with our name on the day checked, or a dated mailbox record exists and the row says the evidence is private. PENDING means an application or filing that has not been granted or submitted; it claims nothing. Rows with a link marked private evidence point at this page, not at a third party, because there is no third-party page to point at.

Named, and not listed

Bodies a reader might expect to find above, and are not there. Three reasons appear: we hold something weaker than the word would suggest, we are not eligible, or the body has no membership to hold. Each says which. This list exists so that absence from the table is an answer rather than a gap.

• World Economic Forum — AI Governance Alliance

  not open to us

  A personal Strategic Intelligence account was opened on 2026-09-21. That is a reader account on My Forum, not a membership or a partnership. WEF corporate participation runs through Partnership, which is invitation-based, revenue-screened and charged in six figures a year, and the AI Governance Alliance is a community inside that structure rather than an open sign-up. weforum.org answers HTTP 403 to every automated client we tried on 2026-09-22, so even that description rests on secondary reporting and is not something we can evidence ourselves. Not listed.

  https://www.weforum.org/communities/ai-governance-alliance/

• European Commission — General-Purpose AI Code of Practice

  not eligible

  The Commission's own text limits signing to providers of general-purpose AI models. Council of AI provides no general-purpose AI model; we measure models other people place on the market. Signing would misdescribe what we are, so we have not applied and will not. This is an eligibility answer, not a backlog item.

  https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/contents-code-gpai

• OECD.AI Network of Experts (ONE AI)

  not open to us

  Members are nominated by OECD member countries and by stakeholder delegations, which renew or replace their representatives each year. There is no application form and no expression-of-interest route, so there is nothing for us to have applied to. The OECD door that is open to a company is the Catalogue of Tools & Metrics for Trustworthy AI, and that is a submission rather than a membership.

  https://oecd.ai/en/network-of-experts

• Global Partnership on AI (GPAI)

  no membership exists

  GPAI membership is held by countries, and its work has been integrated with the OECD. There has never been a company membership to apply for, so any claim of GPAI participation by a company is a category error.

• LF AI & Data Foundation

  not eligible

  The free Associate tier is limited to government bodies, nonprofits and universities. CSOAI Ltd is a private for-profit company and fails that at the first requirement. The tier we could buy starts at USD 15,000 a year at our headcount, less an existing-Linux-Foundation-member discount, and we have not bought it. We do hold Linux Foundation membership at Silver, which is the row above; it is not the same thing.

  https://lfaidata.foundation/join/

• IETF

  no membership exists

  The IETF has no membership. What is true and checkable is listed above as three mailing-list rows and one Internet-Draft. Three further submissions uploaded on 2026-09-12 were never posted and are not documents on the Datatracker, so they are not participation and are not counted here.

• C2PA conformance programme

  application in flight

  Distinct from C2PA membership, which is listed above with public evidence. A conformance application has been in flight since 2026-08-17 and must be resubmitted on the programme's 0.2 intake form. An application is not a conformance result and nothing about it is claimed on any Council of AI surface.

• MLCommons

  no record

  A full sweep of nicholas@csoai.org across the whole of 2026 — every folder, headers and full-text body search — returns exactly one message containing the word MLCommons, and it is outbound: a note we wrote on 2026-09-17 about a measurement WE published, in which MLCommons AILuminate is one of fifteen organisations we examined. There is no welcome, no invoice, no agreement and no confirmation of any kind. Council of AI is not a member of MLCommons and no row claims otherwise. MLCommons does publish a free Observer tier for organisations of nought to nine employees, which we would qualify for; if we ever apply, the conflict — that we have published a measurement about them — is declared in the application and recorded here.

• OpenML

  cannot verify

  A sign-up mail arrived on 2026-08-19 (INBOX 7000) and it is a verification request: "To verify your email address, please click". No confirmation followed, no later OpenML mail exists, and openml.org serves its profiles from a client-side application that we could not query for a user. We therefore cannot show that the account was ever completed. Signing up is not registration, so there is no row — and this entry exists so the absence is recorded rather than read as an oversight.

• Glama

  cannot verify

  Glama mail confirms an account from 2026-04-16 and several approved MCP-server listings. We cannot show it publicly: Glama's index requires an API key, and its terms require visible attribution and a link wherever its records are displayed, which is a condition on republishing rather than an evidence URL a stranger can open. Listed here rather than as a row until a stable public URL exists.

• NVIDIA Inception

  no record

  No application or acceptance record exists in the mailbox as of 2026-09-22. Not listed.

• Agentry

  no record

  The operator's follow-up mail of 2026-09-15 says the agent is listed, but no public listing URL was located and the automated listing confirmation is not in the mailbox. Not listed until a stranger can open the page.

An update is a record of a change, not an announcement of an achievement. Nothing here upgrades a row; the rows say what they prove.

1. 2026-09-22·Recorded

   The mailbox was swept for memberships we hold and were not showing; five were missing and three claims did not survive the sweep

   Every message in nicholas@csoai.org for 2026 was read by header, and the bodies were searched server-side for each body by name. Five things we hold had no row and now have one: Open Invention Network, LOT Network, the EU AI Pact, our comments to BSI committee ART/1, and the mcpservers.org listing. Three did not survive. MLCommons has no membership record at all — the only message naming it is one we wrote about a measurement we published concerning them. OpenML got as far as a verification request and no further. Glama's listings are real but have no public URL a stranger can open. Those three are recorded under Named, and not listed, with the reason, because a membership we cannot show is not the same as one we do not have, and neither may be displayed as current.

   https://councilof.ai/interop/memberships.json

2. 2026-09-22·Row added·open-invention-network

   Open Invention Network lists CSOAI LTD on its public community of licensees

   The OIN 2.0 License Agreement was signed on 2026-08-15 and OIN's public page names us. It is a royalty-free patent cross-licence over the Linux System definition: a patent non-aggression arrangement, not a standards body and not an opinion about anything we measure.

   https://openinventionnetwork.com/community-of-licensees/

3. 2026-09-22·Row added·lot-network

   LOT Network's public member directory lists CSOAI LTD

   LOT Network wrote "Welcome CSOAI LTD to LOT Network" on 2026-08-23. Like the OIN row this is a patent arrangement — licence-on-transfer against patent assertion entities — and nothing about AI governance.

   https://lotnet.com/members/?dir=1&name_directory_startswith=C

4. 2026-09-22·Row added·eu-ai-pact

   The Commission's AI Office recorded us as having joined the AI Pact on 2026-08-20

   Its mail opens "Thank you for having recently joined the AI Pact". An earlier note of ours had reasoned that the AI Pact probably did not apply to a measurement company; the mailbox says we joined it, so the note was wrong and the row is the correction. We have not signed the voluntary pledges and the Commission's public page does not name us, so the row is private evidence and claims neither.

   private evidence INBOX 7036 (EU-AI-PACT@ec.europa.eu, 2026-08-20) and INBOX 7035 (2026-08-20)

5. 2026-09-22·Row added·bsi-art1-comments

   BSI passed fourteen of our comments on a draft British Standard to the manager of committee ART/1

   The comments on draft BS ISO/IEC 4213 (project 2024-01986) were sent on 2026-09-15 and acknowledged the same day. The row says contributor, not member: commenting on a public draft is open to anyone, and we have not been nominated to ART/1.

   private evidence INBOX 8363 (AdminStart@bsigroup.com, 2026-09-15) and INBOX 7116 (2026-08-22)

6. 2026-09-22·Row added·mcpservers-org

   The mcpservers.org directory approved the Council of AI GSPC server on 2026-09-05

   Recorded as private evidence rather than a public URL: mcpservers.org answers HTTP 403 to automated clients, and the only place our name appears in that response is the URL we ourselves asked for, echoed back in the challenge. A name that comes from our own request proves nothing about the page.

   private evidence INBOX 7848 (contact@mcpservers.org, 2026-09-05)

7. 2026-09-22·Evidence re-checked

   Every public evidence URL in the manifest was re-fetched and answered with our name

   scripts/memberships-check.mjs was run against the live web. Every public-evidence row answered HTTP 200 and named Council of AI, CSOAI or Templeman, except the US Treasury row, which is corrected below. Private-evidence rows were schema-validated and not fetched, because nothing on the network can confirm them; the manifest says so on each one. The check's own --selftest passed first, so the run is one that could have failed.

   command node scripts/memberships-check.mjs

8. 2026-09-22·Row corrected·us-treasury-genius-docket

   Evidence moved from regulations.gov to the Federal Register document, same docket

   regulations.gov answers HTTP 403 to every non-browser client, so the row was failing its own check for a reason that had nothing to do with the filing. The evidence is now Federal Register document 2026-16796, published 2026-08-18, which names docket TREAS-DO-2026-0496 and carries the closing date. The comment is still submitted at regulations.gov and the row still says PENDING: nothing has been filed.

   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/08/18/2026-16796/genius-act-regulations-on-payment-stablecoin-issuance-offer-and-sale

9. 2026-09-22·Row added·openaire

   OpenAIRE harvested the Zenodo deposit; the record names Council of AI

   A query to OpenAIRE for DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21991105 returns one research product naming Council of AI, CSOAI and Templeman. Harvesting is automatic and the record's own status field read UNDER_CURATION, so the row is indexing, not review.

   https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?pid=10.5281%2Fzenodo.21991105

10. 2026-09-22·Recorded

    The named-and-not-listed list now carries the bodies we are not eligible for, with the reason

    Absence from the table used to be a gap. It is now an answer. The European Commission's General-Purpose AI Code of Practice is limited to providers of general-purpose AI models and we provide none. OECD.AI's Network of Experts is nominated by countries, not applied to. GPAI membership is held by countries. LF AI & Data's free tier excludes for-profit companies. The IETF has no membership at all. Each of those is recorded with its source rather than left blank.

    https://councilof.ai/interop/memberships.json

11. 2026-09-22·Row added·w3c-agent-conformance

    Joined the W3C Agent Conformance and Benchmarking Community Group on behalf of csoai ltd

    The join page reported that the organisation had already signed the group's Contributor License Agreement, and the public participants page names us the same day. Community Groups are free and open; this is participation, not W3C Membership.

    https://www.w3.org/community/agent-conformance/participants

12. 2026-09-22·Row added·w3c-aikr

    Became a participant in the W3C AI KR Community Group representing csoai ltd

    The W3C Accounts Team recorded the participation at 04:27 UTC. The group has adopted nothing of ours and W3C has reviewed nothing of ours.

    https://www.w3.org/community/aikr/participants

13. 2026-09-22·Recorded·bank-of-england-code-of-practice

    Consultation response sent to the Bank of England on the systemic stablecoin Code of Practice

    Sent to the address the Bank published for the consultation, with Date and Message-ID headers. The Bank publishes no acknowledgement we can link to, so the row is marked private evidence. A response is a submission, not recognition.

    private evidence Sent 499 (2026-09-22, Message-ID <1509486989.87654.1790069007934@privateemail.com>)

14. 2026-09-21·Row added·linux-foundation

    Linux Foundation membership agreement completed by all parties

    DocuSign reported the envelope completed by all parties on 2026-09-21. The member portal record M-018884 (login required) gives the tier as Silver. The public members page did not name us on 2026-09-22, so the row is marked private evidence. Membership is a paid participation tier, not an endorsement of anything we publish.

    private evidence INBOX 8955 (the Linux Foundation, 2026-09-21: one DocuSign envelope carrying the membership agreement for both the Open Secure AI Alliance and the Linux Foundation memberships) and INBOX 8987 (DocuSign, 2026-09-21 22:56 UTC: 'All parties have completed')

15. 2026-09-21·Row added·osaia

    Became a member of the Open Secure AI Alliance

    The participation agreement was completed by all parties via DocuSign, and the Alliance's onboarding mail opened 'Thank you for becoming a member', following an application received on 2026-09-18. The Alliance publishes no member list, so the evidence is private. The note CSOAI published to the Alliance's SAFE discussion is our own; we have no record of SAFE adopting or acknowledging it.

    private evidence INBOX 8987 (DocuSign completed, 2026-09-21), INBOX 8988 (2026-09-21) and INBOX 8859 (2026-09-18)

16. 2026-09-21·Recorded·dif

    DIF asked which name to display for our Contributor Member listing; we answered the same day

    The Contributor agreement was completed in the name of CSOAI LTD on 2026-08-18. DIF publishes no member roster we could find — identity.foundation/members answered 404 on 2026-09-22 — so no public page confirms this yet and the row says so.

    private evidence INBOX 8945 (DIF Membership, 2026-09-21) and Sent 487 (2026-09-21)

This log is the committed artifact rendered, as of 2026-09-22, unsigned and saying so. An entry cannot appear here without being in the bytes first, and every entry that names a row names one the manifest actually has — scripts/memberships-check.mjs fails when it does not.