{
  "title": "Talent representation and media scope records for AI",
  "source_page": "https://fiund.com/industries/talent-representation-scope-data",
  "authorship": "Original fictional Fiund editorial exercise. No actual operating records or third-party source assets are included.",
  "example": {
    "title": "Authority to negotiate is different from authority to license the recording",
    "context": "A fictional performer alias, agency and asset owner have independently written practice terms. No actual client agreement, likeness or commercial deal is represented.",
    "records": [
      [
        "TA1",
        "Practice representation record",
        "Performer P authorizes agency A to negotiate uses U1 and U2 through day 20. Record expressly does not transfer copyright."
      ],
      [
        "TA2",
        "Asset source card",
        "Recording R belongs to separate owner O. No O permission for the requested use supplied."
      ],
      [
        "TA3",
        "Proposed extension",
        "Draft adds U3 and extends to day 30, but approval blank. Request asks A to license R for U3 on day 25."
      ]
    ],
    "question": "Which parts of the requested authority are supported, and can the draft or representation record establish U3, day-25 or recording-owner permission?",
    "answer": "TA1 supports only the stated negotiation scope U1/U2 through day 20 and expressly leaves copyright ownership separate. TA3's U3 request on day 25 exceeds both that use scope and term, while the draft supplies no approval. TA2 also leaves owner O's recording permission absent. Identify these independent gaps rather than treating representation as ownership, a draft as an extension or negotiation authority as a completed asset license.",
    "failureModes": [
      "Using a representation role as proof of recording ownership or an executed license.",
      "Applying unapproved new uses or a later term from a draft extension."
    ],
    "fields": [
      [
        "Representative and named authority",
        "Defines the action the agency may perform."
      ],
      [
        "Permitted uses and term",
        "Makes the requested scope comparison explicit."
      ],
      [
        "Asset owner and separate grant",
        "Keeps recording authority distinct from performer representation."
      ]
    ],
    "holdout": "Approve the U3 term extension but leave owner O's grant absent. Require the answer to resolve representation scope while retaining the recording-permission gap.",
    "boundary": "Use invented aliases and independent terms. Exclude actual names, likenesses, communications, contacts, deal terms and recordings; real interpretation stays with authorized professionals."
  }
}