4-Slide Mini Deck · Governing Relationship State
Governing Relationship State, in four slides
Micheal Charles Preble · Operant Dyad — Paper 4 · SSRN 7396659
Slide 1 of 4
The Problem
Information can remain available, portable, and historically accurate after the factual, legal, or institutional predicate that once justified consequential reliance on it has changed. A role can end while the system still remembers it.
Slide 2 of 4
The Contribution
The relevant legal object is lawful continuing reliance, not ownership. Proposes a purpose-limited governance interest in Covered Relationship State, supporting eight duties: Visibility, Contestability, Provenance, Revalidation, Restriction, Retirement, Transition review, and Material Reconstitution safeguards.
Slide 3 of 4
How It Works · Evidence Status
A comparative U.S./EU legal synthesis (GDPR, FCRA, HIPAA, federal records law, EU Data Act, real case law) — not an empirical study.
Evidence status: Conceptual legal and institutional analysis; published preprint.
Slide 4 of 4
Why It Matters · Limits · Open Questions
A durable record can preserve what was once true without determining what remains authorized now — that distinction is what the framework aims to make governable.
Limits: does not override third-party rights, trade secrets, or public duties. Open: institutional overlap with sector-specific systems is the paper's own most important unresolved question.
Preble, Micheal Charles. “Governing Relationship State: A Legal Framework for Human-Controlled AI Continuity” Available at SSRN 7396659, 2026.