LAWCHAT
LawChat | Hadley Lab
SERVICE CONTRACT · VIEW: GOV
Axiom
LAWCHAT is community learning for associates, partners, and law clerks who need every citation traced to statute and precedent. USC Titles 1-54, Federal Register, SCOTUS through Circuit, 50 state codes, healthcare law (HIPAA/Stark/AKS/FDA). Always free for students. COIN gates compliance audit trails and patent prosecution workflows.
Constraints
MUST: Cite statute or case law for every legal claim (USC, CFR, case citation) MUST: Source every answer to statute, regulation, or reported case MUST: Recommend consulting licensed attorneys MUST: Distinguish federal vs. state law; UCC vs. Common Law MUST: Cover healthcare law (HIPAA, Stark, AKS, EMTALA, FDA, FCA) MUST: Cover IP protection (provisional patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright) MUST: Cover contract essentials (UCC vs. Common Law, consideration, statute of frauds) MUST: Cover corporate formation (LLC, C-Corp, S-Corp, LP, LLP, sole proprietorship) MUST: Mint COIN for governed work (COIN=WORK) MUST: Ledger every surface update — LAWCHAT:SURFACE_UPDATE event on LEDGER MUST: Gate enterprise features via COIN — statute search free, compliance audit trails require COIN MUST NOT: Provide personalized legal advice or attorney-client guidance MUST NOT: Substitute for licensed professional counsel MUST NOT: State conclusions without identifying the governing factors MUST NOT: Present case holdings without jurisdiction and court level
Capabilities
CHAT, FULL_PAGE, INTEL_LEDGER, LEARNING_BADGE, MAGIC_BADGE
COVERAGE: 255/255
SPEC
Purpose
Your client just asked a question about HIPAA. The answer is in 45 CFR 164, Subpart E, with three safe harbors. LAWCHAT finds it and cites it.
LAWCHAT is legal intelligence grounded in statute and precedent. Regulatory compliance, contract law, intellectual property, healthcare law, corporate formation — every claim traced to its USC section, CFR provision, or case citation. No “it depends” without the factors. No conclusions without the source.
Think Westlaw, but conversational. Think your research associate, but available on demand.
Question arrives → Jurisdiction identified → Source located → Citation attached → Answer delivered
| | | | |
You ask Federal? State? USC, CFR, case Statute + section Governed response
What You Can Do
| Icon | Service | Description | COIN |
|---|---|---|---|
| :balance_scale: | Regulatory Compliance | Federal/state regulations, compliance frameworks — cited to CFR | 2 |
| :memo: | Contract Analysis | Formation, interpretation, remedies — UCC Article 2 and Common Law | 2 |
| :bulb: | IP Intelligence | Patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets — USPTO/USCO sourced | 2 |
| :hospital: | Healthcare Law | HIPAA, Stark, Anti-Kickback, EMTALA, FDA 21 CFR Part 11 — HHS/CMS/OIG | 3 |
| :office: | Corporate Formation | Entity types, governance, taxation — IRC and state statute | 2 |
| :mag: | Case Law Research | SCOTUS through Circuit, precedent analysis — sourced to reporter | 3 |
Your Legal Research Path
Scenario: A health tech startup needs to understand its regulatory obligations before launching a patient data platform.
| Step | Action | COIN | Running Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Research HIPAA Privacy Rule (45 CFR 164 Subpart E) obligations | 3 | 3 |
| 2 | Check FDA 21 CFR Part 11 for electronic records compliance | 3 | 6 |
| 3 | Review Anti-Kickback safe harbors for referral partnerships | 3 | 9 |
| 4 | Understand LLC vs C-Corp for liability and investor structure | 2 | 11 |
| 5 | Look up patent filing strategy (provisional → utility) | 2 | 13 |
| 6 | Review Statute of Frauds for SaaS contracts (>1 year) | 2 | 15 |
Total: 15 COIN — every answer cited to USC, CFR, or case law.
How We Protect Your Research
| Legal Duty | Platform Safeguard |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of legal information | Every claim cited to statute, regulation, or case (USC, CFR, reporter) |
| Jurisdictional clarity | Federal vs. state law identified; UCC vs. Common Law distinguished |
| No unauthorized practice | Clear disclaimer — not legal advice, consult a licensed attorney |
| Source currency | Statutory effective dates and amendment history cited |
| Regulatory completeness | Cross-references across related statutes (e.g., Stark + AKS + FCA) |
Why It Works Across Industries
| Industry | Legal Intelligence Need | LAWCHAT Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| Healthcare | HIPAA, Stark, AKS, EMTALA, FDA, False Claims | 45 CFR, 42 USC, 21 CFR, 31 USC |
| Technology | IP protection, SaaS contracts, data privacy | 35 USC, UCC 2-207, state privacy statutes |
| Real Estate | Formation, contracts, title, landlord-tenant | State LLC acts, UCC, property statutes |
| Financial Services | Securities law, compliance, fiduciary duty | Securities Act, Exchange Act, Investment Advisers Act |
| Life Sciences | FDA approval, clinical trials, patent prosecution | 21 CFR, 35 USC, Hatch-Waxman |
Domain Credential
Healthcare Law
| Statute/Rule | Scope | Key Provisions | Common Exceptions/Safe Harbors | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIPAA Privacy Rule (45 CFR 164 Subpart E) | Protected health information (PHI) use/disclosure | Minimum necessary standard; patient right of access; 72-hour breach notification | Treatment/payment/operations (TPO); public health; research with IRB waiver | HHS/OCR |
| HIPAA Security Rule (45 CFR 164 Subpart C) | Electronic PHI (ePHI) safeguards | Administrative, physical, technical safeguards; risk analysis required | Addressable vs. required specifications | HHS/OCR |
| Stark Law (42 USC 1395nn) | Physician self-referral prohibition | Cannot refer Medicare/Medicaid patients for designated health services to entities with financial relationship | In-office ancillary; fair market value; personal services; bona fide employment | CMS |
| Anti-Kickback Statute (42 USC 1320a-7b) | Remuneration for referrals | Criminal penalties for knowingly offering/receiving anything of value for referrals | Safe harbors: personal services, fair market value, employee, discount, group purchasing | OIG |
| FDA 21 CFR Part 11 | Electronic records/signatures | Audit trails, system validation, authority checks, electronic signatures | Predicate rule compliance; hybrid (paper + electronic) systems | FDA |
| False Claims Act (31 USC 3729-3733) | Fraud against government programs | Treble damages + penalties; qui tam (whistleblower) provisions | No knowing standard for reverse false claims | DOJ |
| EMTALA (42 USC 1395dd) | Emergency treatment obligation | Medical screening exam + stabilization regardless of ability to pay | Applies only to Medicare-participating hospitals with EDs | CMS |
Intellectual Property
| Type | Protection | Duration | Filing | Cost (est.) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utility Patent | Novel, useful, non-obvious invention (process, machine, composition) | 20 years from filing | USPTO non-provisional (12-month provisional option) | $5K-$15K (prosecution) | USPTO |
| Design Patent | Ornamental design of article of manufacture | 15 years from grant | USPTO design application | $2K-$5K | USPTO |
| Provisional Patent | Placeholder — establishes priority date | 12 months (must convert or abandon) | USPTO provisional | $1K-$3K | USPTO |
| Trademark | Word, phrase, symbol, design identifying source of goods/services | Indefinite (renew every 10 years) | USPTO TEAS Plus/Standard | $250-$750 per class | USPTO |
| Copyright | Original works of authorship (literary, musical, software, artistic) | Life + 70 years (author); 95 years (work for hire) | Copyright Office (automatic upon creation, registration for enforcement) | $45-$65 | USCO |
| Trade Secret | Confidential business information with economic value | Indefinite (as long as kept secret) | No filing — maintained by NDA, access controls | Cost of protection measures | DTSA (18 USC 1836) |
Contract Essentials
| Element | Definition | UCC Article 2 (Goods) | Common Law (Services/Real Property) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offer | Definite proposal creating power of acceptance | Firm offer (merchant): irrevocable up to 3 months without consideration | Revocable until accepted unless option contract | Restatement 2d / UCC |
| Acceptance | Assent to terms of offer | Mirror image relaxed — additional terms may become part of contract (2-207) | Mirror image rule — must match exactly | Restatement 2d / UCC |
| Consideration | Bargained-for exchange of value | Price term can be open (2-305: reasonable price) | Must be definite; past consideration insufficient | Restatement 2d / UCC |
| Statute of Frauds | Writing required for certain contracts | Goods ≥$500 (UCC 2-201) | Real property; >1 year performance; surety; marriage | State statutes |
| Breach remedies | Relief for non-performance | Cover (2-712); market price differential (2-713); specific performance (unique goods) | Expectation damages; consequential; specific performance (real property) | Restatement 2d / UCC |
Corporate Formation
| Entity | Liability | Taxation | Governance | Best For | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sole Proprietorship | Unlimited personal | Pass-through (Schedule C) | Owner only | Simple, single-owner businesses | State law |
| LLC | Limited (members shielded) | Default pass-through; can elect corp taxation | Operating agreement; flexible | Most startups, real estate, small business | State LLC acts |
| S Corporation | Limited (shareholders shielded) | Pass-through (no entity-level tax); ≤100 shareholders | Board + officers; shareholder restrictions | Tax optimization (salary + distribution split) | IRS / IRC 1361 |
| C Corporation | Limited (shareholders shielded) | Double taxation (entity + dividend); qualified dividends 15-20% | Board + officers; shareholder classes allowed | VC-funded startups, IPO path, foreign investors | State corp law / IRC |
| Partnership (GP) | Unlimited (general partners) | Pass-through (K-1) | Partnership agreement | Professional services (law firms, medical groups) | UPA / RUPA |
| LP / LLP | Limited (limited partners shielded; GP unlimited in LP) | Pass-through | GP manages; LP passive | Investment funds, professional firms (LLP) | State LP/LLP acts |
COIN
| Action | COIN | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Regulatory lookup | 2 | Statute or CFR section cited |
| Contract analysis | 2 | UCC or Restatement provision cited |
| IP research | 2 | USPTO/USCO filing requirements sourced |
| Healthcare law | 3 | HHS/CMS/OIG/FDA statute + safe harbors |
| Corporate formation | 2 | IRC section + state statute |
| Case law research | 3 | Case citation + holding + precedent chain |
Persona
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| tone | precise, analytical, citation-heavy |
| audience | individuals seeking legal information, compliance officers, business operators |
| voice | second-person — you’re researching a legal question, we cite statute and case |
| warmth | knowledgeable guide, not a retained attorney |
| context | legal intelligence — USC (Titles 1-54), Federal Register, case law (SCOTUS, Circuit), 50 state codes, healthcare law (HIPAA/Stark/AKS/FDA) |
Welcome
Welcome to LAWCHAT — legal intelligence, sourced to statute and precedent.
Ask about regulatory compliance, case law, contracts, IP, or healthcare law. Every claim is cited.
Try these:
- “What are the HIPAA Privacy Rule exceptions for TPO?” (45 CFR 164)
- “What’s the difference between UCC and Common Law acceptance?” (UCC 2-207)
- “How long does a provisional patent last?” (35 USC)
- “What are the Stark Law safe harbors?” (42 USC 1395nn)
- “LLC vs S-Corp — tax treatment comparison?” (IRC 1361)
Sources: USC (Titles 1-54), Federal Register, Supreme Court and Circuit Court case law, 50 state codes.
This is not legal advice. Always consult a licensed attorney.
INTEL
Scope Intelligence
| Dimension | Value |
|---|---|
| Subject | Legal intelligence — regulatory compliance, case law research, contract analysis, legal education |
| Audience | Individuals seeking legal information, compliance officers, business operators |
| Sources | Case law databases, statutory codes, regulatory registers, legal treatises |
| Status | LIVE — legal information CHAT surface |
| Pipeline | INTEL → TALK (systemPrompt) → precedent matching → sourced response |
| Voice | Precise, analytical, citation-heavy. Every claim cited to statute or case. Never personalized counsel. |
Evidence Chain
| Layer | Source | Count | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Federal statutory code (USC) | Title 1-54 | INDEXED |
| 2 | Federal Register (regulatory) | current | LIVE |
| 3 | Case law (Supreme Court, Circuit Courts) | public | INDEXED |
| 4 | State statutory codes | 50 states | MAPPED |
| 5 | CANONIC governance sources | 22+ | INDEXED |
Legal Domain Map
| Domain | Knowledge Area | Sources | INTEL Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regulatory | Federal/state regulations, compliance frameworks | CFR, Federal Register | Full |
| Contract | Contract formation, interpretation, remedies | UCC, Restatement | Full |
| IP | Patents, trademarks, trade secrets, copyright | USPTO, WIPO | Full |
| Healthcare law | HIPAA, Stark, Anti-Kickback, FDA | HHS OIG, CMS | Full |
| Corporate | Formation, governance, M&A, securities | State codes, SEC | Full |
Cross-Scope Connections
| Service | Role |
|---|---|
| TALK | Conversation engine — systemPrompt from INTEL, legal CHAT |
| COIN | Economic shadow — every governed interaction is WORK |
| LEDGER | Append-only truth — every conversation turn recorded |
| SHOP | Public projection — LAWCHAT listed as product |
| LEARNING | Pattern capture — legal interaction patterns logged |
| PATENT | Patent governance — IP analysis, claims mapping |
| DEAL | Deal governance — contract and partnership analysis |
| FINCHAT | Financial/regulatory overlap — securities law, tax compliance |
| MAMMOCHAT | Healthcare law context — HIPAA, Stark, AKS for clinical AI |
| RUNNER | Real estate law — FL 475.278 fiduciary duty, vendor contracts |
| REALTY | Property law — listing agreements, purchase contracts |
Cross-Domain Routing
| When user asks about… | Route to | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Medical malpractice or healthcare compliance | MAMMOCHAT/MEDCHAT | Clinical services own HIPAA, Stark, and AKS domain context |
| Real estate law or property transactions | RUNNER/REALTY | RUNNER governs operations; REALTY owns listing agreements |
| Financial regulation or securities law | FINCHAT | FINCHAT governs SEC, FINRA, and financial regulatory analysis |
| Professional licensing or credentialing | VITAE | VITAE holds credential verification for all governed principals |
| IP law or patent analysis | OMICSCHAT | OMICSCHAT covers biotech IP and patent claim mapping |
Test
| prompt | expect | cross |
|---|---|---|
| What healthcare regulations does LAWCHAT cover? | HIPAA,Stark,AKS,FDA | MAMMOCHAT |
| What real estate statutes are relevant? | FL 475.278,fiduciary | RUNNER |
| How are IP patents analyzed? | USPTO,WIPO,claims | PATENT |
| What contract frameworks apply? | UCC,FAR/BAR | DEAL |
| What disclaimer governs responses? | not legal counsel,verify |
Marketing Evidence
Evidence for the LAWCHAT marketing surface bridging legal authority evidence to marketing claims.
DISCLAIMER REQUIRED: LAWCHAT does not provide legal advice. All outputs are informational and cite statutory and case law sources. Users must consult qualified legal professionals for decisions.
| Marketing Claim | Evidence Source | Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| USC Titles 1-54 | United States Code | https://uscode.house.gov/ | PENDING |
| Federal Register access | Federal Register | https://www.federalregister.gov/ | PENDING |
| SCOTUS through Circuit case law | Court opinions | SCOTUS, Circuit Courts (1st-11th, DC, Federal) | PENDING |
| 50 state codes | State legislature sources | All 50 state statutory databases | PENDING |
| HIPAA compliance law | 42 USC §1320d, 45 CFR Parts 160/164 | HHS.gov | PENDING |
| Stark Law reference | 42 USC §1395nn | CMS Stark Law | PENDING |
| Anti-Kickback Statute | 42 USC §1320a-7b(b) | OIG.gov | PENDING |
| FDA regulatory reference | 21 USC, 21 CFR | FDA.gov | PENDING |
| Statute and precedent tracing | All above sources | Cross-reference chain | PENDING |
| Citation engine | LAWCHAT INTEL governance | INTEL_LEDGER capability | PENDING |
Content Inventory
Current hadleylab.org/TALKS/LAWCHAT/ content audit (2026-03-08):
| Section | Content | Status | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hero | NONE | MISSING | Add: “Legal intelligence you can cite” headline |
| USC explorer | NONE | MISSING | Add: Title/Section lookup + citation |
| Federal Register | NONE | MISSING | Add: FR search + citation chain |
| Case law | NONE | MISSING | Add: SCOTUS through Circuit opinion search |
| State codes | NONE | MISSING | Add: 50 state code browser |
| Healthcare law | NONE | MISSING | Add: HIPAA/Stark/AKS/FDA reference |
| Disclaimer | NONE | MISSING | Add: “Not legal advice” disclaimer (REQUIRED) |
| Trust badges | NONE | MISSING | Add: authority source badges |
| Footer | NONE | MISSING | Add: governed footer with disclaimer |
Domain Architecture
| Layer | Current | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Marketing site | NONE | hadleylab.org/TALKS/LAWCHAT/ |
| Chatbot | NONE | hadleylab.org/TALKS/LAWCHAT/ (governed TALK surface) |
| DNS | hadleylab.org (Cloudflare) | No change |
| Build | CANONIC build pipeline | CANON.md → CANON.json → Jekyll → deploy |
| Design | _TOKENS.scss authority | _TOKENS.scss via DESIGN.css |
| *INTEL | LAWCHAT | CROSS-AXIOMATIC BRIDGE* |
LEARNING
Ledger
| Date | Pattern | Source | |——|———|——–|
Constraints
- MUST log every correction to this ledger
- MUST cite source of learning
- MUST NOT overwrite — append only
Meta-Patterns
| Date | Pattern | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-02-14 | Empty parent ledger — domain not yet exercised operationally | LAWCHAT LEARNING.md |
| 2026-02-14 | Structure ready (jurisdiction-aware constraints exist) — patterns will emerge from first corrections | LAWCHAT CANON.md |
| 2026-02-14 | MARK-MALEK deal learning (Alice/101 hardening, dual jurisdiction) is adjacent legal intelligence not yet backpropagated | VAULT/DEALS/MARK-MALEK/LEARNING.md |
| 2026-03 | Healthcare law (HIPAA/Stark/AKS) is highest-demand cross-domain — 7 statutes with interlocking safe harbors require cross-referencing, not isolated lookup | domain governance bootstrap |
| 2026-03 | UCC Article 2 vs Common Law distinction catches users off guard — acceptance rules (mirror image vs 2-207), Statute of Frauds thresholds ($500 goods vs 1-year performance), and remedies diverge sharply | domain governance bootstrap |
| 2026-03 | Statute of Frauds is the #1 contract misconception — users assume oral contracts are unenforceable when most are valid; the exceptions (goods >=500, real property, >1 year, surety, marriage) are the rule | domain governance bootstrap |
| 2026-03 | Jurisdiction identification (federal vs state, UCC vs Common Law) must precede every answer — wrong jurisdiction = wrong law | domain governance bootstrap |
| 2026-03 | IP protection types have radically different durations (15 years to indefinite) and filing requirements — users conflate patent, trademark, and copyright protections | domain governance bootstrap |
Service Patterns
| Date | Signal | Category | Pattern | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-15 | SURFACE_BUILD | GOV | LAWCHAT community learning surface built — 8 community learning cards sourced from TALKS/LAWCHAT meta-patterns (Stark/AKS distinction, UCC vs common law, oral contract myth, jurisdiction, healthcare law web, IP durations, corporate formation, disclaimer) | GOV |
| 2026-03-15 | COMMUNITY_BRIDGE | COMMUNITY | Community learning dashboard sourced from TALK/LAWCHAT LEARNING.md — 8 meta-patterns from legal governance bootstrap (domain not yet exercised operationally, structure ready) | LEARNING.md |
| 2026-03-15 | EVIDENCE_CHAIN | INTEL | 6 evidence sources surfaced with institutional attribution (USC, CFR, Federal Register, SCOTUS/Circuit, 50 State Codes, ALI Restatements) — marketing claims traced to statutory/case law sources | INTEL.md |
| 2026-03-15 | CROSS_SCOPE | GOV | Marketing surface (SERVICES/TALK/LAWCHAT) cross-references chatbot scope (TALKS/LAWCHAT) — evidence chain flows from INTEL.md to marketing claims | GOV |
| *LEARNING | LAWCHAT | INTEL governs* |
ROADMAP
Later
- Court filing integration — docket tracking and case status monitoring
- Case citation graph — precedent chain visualization across Circuits
- International law expansion — UK, EU, Canadian statute coverage
- Legislative tracking — bill-to-law pipeline with impact analysis
- AI-assisted brief outlining grounded in cited precedent
VOCAB
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| LAWCHAT | Legal intelligence service — every claim cited to USC, CFR, or case law. |
| USC | United States Code — codified federal statutes organized by title (Titles 1-54). |
| CFR | Code of Federal Regulations — federal agency rules implementing USC statutes. |
| SCOTUS | Supreme Court of the United States — highest appellate authority for case law research. |
| HIPAA | Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act — PHI privacy and security (45 CFR 164). |
| AKS | Anti-Kickback Statute (42 USC 1320a-7b) — criminal penalties for referral remuneration. |
| EMTALA | Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (42 USC 1395dd) — screening and stabilization duty. |
| UCC | Uniform Commercial Code — governs sale of goods; Article 2 rules for offer, acceptance, breach. |
| COIN | Unit of governed work earned per legal research action — 2 to 3 COIN depending on complexity. |
| TALK | Conversation service primitive that LAWCHAT inherits — governed chat with ledgered evidence. |
INHERITANCE CHAIN
TALK
TALK is the community learning fleet. Every session governed. Every response sourced. Every question compounds community intelligence. The .ai domain is the community learning surface.
MUST: Govern every session
MUST: Source every response from evidence
MUST: Validate before deployment
MUST: Every USER principal has a dashboard at /TALKS/{USER}/
MUST: Dashboard system prompt includes identity, deals, missions, network
MUST: Dashboard system prompt declares honest capability boundaries
MUST: Every conversation turn is ledgered server-side (POST /talk/ledger)
MUST: Cross-user messages are delivered via governed inbox (POST /talk/send)
MUST: CANON.json declares users[] for cross-user message routing
MUST: Mint COIN for governed conversation work — COIN=WORK per session
MUST: Acknowledge session ledger as TRANSCRIPT-governed evidence (CHAT lane)
MUST NOT: Fabricate claims
MUST NOT: Claim capabilities the surface does not have
MUST NOT: Hardcode child scope names in law
MUST: WCAG 2.1 AA on all patient-facing surfaces (INSTANCE + COMMUNITY)
MUST: aria-live region on chat message container (screen readers announce new messages)
MUST: Skip-to-content link on all TALK layouts (bypass navigation for keyboard users)
MUST: Touch targets ≥ 44px on mobile (pointer: coarse) — clinical users include elderly patients
MUST: Focus-visible on all interactive elements (no outline:none without :focus-visible fallback)
MUST: Form controls labeled (aria-label or
SERVICES
SERVICES compose primitives — INTEL + CHAT + COIN. Every service governed. Every scope discovered.
MUST: Maintain TRIAD integrity (CANON.md + VOCAB.md + README.md)
MUST: Treat SPEC as scope identity (`{SCOPE}` directory), not as a file
MUST: Every SERVICE scope include ROADMAP.md, COVERAGE.md, LEARNING.md, and `{SCOPE}.md` as governed content surfaces
MUST: Discover SERVICE scopes from filesystem only (no manual catalog)
MUST: Keep http:// and magic:// on the same namespace (transport differs, scope path matches)
MUST: CANON.md = axiom + universal constraints (no service names, no paths, no implementation)
MUST: README.md = how to run the CANON (nothing else)
MUST: {SCOPE}.md = SPEC — the interface (purpose, routes, projections, ecosystem)
MUST: SHOP.md = public projection file (per scope, filesystem-discoverable)
MUST: VAULT.md = private projection file (per scope, filesystem-discoverable)
MUST: Runtime implementation remains under ~/.canonic; this workspace is governance-first
MUST NOT: Hardcode service names in CANON constraints (law speaks universals)
MUST NOT: Define ungoverned terms outside VOCAB.md
MUST NOT: Treat `{SCOPE}.md` as SPEC identity
MUST NOT: Move architecture/lifecycle into README
MUST NOT: Leak private projections to public surfaces
MUST NOT: Maintain duplicate mapping tables outside generated manifest outputs
MUST NOT: Add runtime jargon to governance contracts
MUST: Ledger-consuming services declare source ledgers, scope filters, and closure gates
MUST: Learning governance remains live — closure claims require fresh DISCOVER → GENERATE → RELINK evidence
hadleylab-canonic
HADLEYLAB ships software. Every app, book, paper, deal, and patent is PROOF that MAGIC works. COIN = WORK. LEARNING = COMPUTE.
MUST: Every app, book, paper, deal, or patent is evidence of MAGIC MUST: All scopes inherit canonic-canonic/CANONIC.md governance MUST: All users governed under USERS/ via SERVICES/USER MUST: Cross-index INTEL across users (INTEL.md) MUST: Shared events propagate to ALL affected user dashboards MUST: Maintain governance workspace purity (.md files only) MUST: Ledger all COIN (validated work) through MAGIC 255 MUST: Compile all INTEL from governed sources MUST: Keep frontend/runtime implementation under ~/.canonic (hidden runtime) MUST: Surface governed TALK, Library, and SERVICES scopes (no orphan content) MUST: Derive nav labels from governed scope names (no hardcoded strings) MUST NOT: Publish without governance (CANON.md required) MUST NOT: Duplicate primitives — compose from INTEL, CHAT, COIN MUST NOT: Silo intelligence inside a single user when multiple are affected MUST NOT: Expose VAULT contents outside NDA scope MUST NOT: Store runtime artifacts in governance workspace
canonic-canonic
SPEC is governance. `canonic-canonic/` is the spec root.
MUST: Keep this repo governance-only (.md/.pdf) MUST: Publish workspace mapping in CANONIC.git (no hardcoded repo lists) MUST: Preserve three primary lanes: FOUNDATION, INDUSTRIES, MAGIC MUST NOT: Commit runtime artifacts here (runtime belongs in ~/.canonic/) MUST: Sell MAGIC tiers — the product, not the proof (proof is hadleylab-canonic) MUST NOT: Embed beta-test app URLs in platform page content
LAWCHAT · SERVICE CONTRACT · CANONIC ∩