Research Map · Authority Does Not Travel by Default
A boundary map, not a flow
This paper's argument is a set of distinctions that must not be collapsed into each other, so the map reproduces those distinctions directly rather than forcing a sequence.
The boundary map
- Technical portabilityis notlawful portability
- Source authorityis notdestination authority
- Retentionis notoperative use
- A guardianis nota universal controller
- A supporteris not automaticallya substitute decision-maker
- Third-party presenceis nota universal veto
- Automationis notlegal authority
- Provider custodyis notprovider supremacy
- Person-centerednessis notexclusive personal legal control
Reading the map
Each line names a shortcut the paper argues against. The most common failure mode it identifies is compressing several of these into one: assuming that because information moved successfully (technical portability), the destination is automatically entitled to use it (lawful portability) under the authority the source once had (source authority = destination authority). The paper's contribution is keeping these questions separate rather than resolving any one of them universally.
Citation
Suggested citation
Preble, Micheal Charles. “Authority Does Not Travel by Default: Legal Provenance and Revalidation in Persistent Human–AI Continuity” Available at SSRN 7359661, 2026.
Preble, Micheal Charles. “Authority Does Not Travel by Default: Legal Provenance and Revalidation in Persistent Human–AI Continuity” Available at SSRN 7359661, 2026.