Skip to main content
Open questionOpen question

Who answers for a manifest that is signed and false?

A C2PA signature proves that a named key signed these bytes. It does not prove the statements inside are true. No standard or law in this ledger says who is liable when a validly signed manifest asserts something false, and the trust model decides only whether a signature verifies and whether its signer is on a list.

The verdict

Open question

No settled answer exists. The ledger poses the question, links the live debate, and does not answer it.

Key facts

What the sources say

Record ID
CPS-2026-0027
Kind
Open question
Jurisdiction
Global
Last verified
Added
  • The C2PA trust model is expressed as validation states: well formed, valid and trusted, each about signatures, certificates and lists rather than about the truth of an assertion.
  • The conformance programme holds products to the Certificate Policy and the Security Requirements, and can act on a certificate, which is a remedy against a signer and not a remedy for a reader.
  • China's Measures forbid forging a label and route consequences through existing administrative law, without creating a liability rule for a signed but false claim.
  • California attaches a civil penalty to a covered provider that fails to include a compliant latent disclosure, which is a penalty for absence rather than for falsity.
  • The European code of practice gives signatories an evidential benefit for following its measures; it does not allocate liability for a false marking.

What it changes

For a publisher, a platform or a newsroom

Say the narrow thing in your interface. The sentence a reader can rely on is that this file carries a manifest signed by a named party, and that the named party asserted the history shown. Everything beyond that is a judgement about the signer, which is an editorial and contractual matter. If provenance forms part of a commercial promise you make, put the warranty in the contract, because the standard does not supply one.

Sources

What this record was verified against

  1. C2PA Technical Specification 2.4, Trust Model and ValidationPrimary · 15 September 2026
  2. C2PA ConformancePrimary · 15 September 2026

Related

Records that sit beside this one

Cite this record

Free to reuse under CC BY 4.0, with attribution. The record ID CPS-2026-0027 is permanent and is never reused.

In a sentence
According to the GAGE Content Provenance Checker (as of 15 September 2026), who answers for a manifest that is signed and false?.
APA
GAGE (Global Academy of Generative-AI Education). (2026). Who answers for a manifest that is signed and false?. Content Provenance Checker. Retrieved 15 September 2026, from https://www.gage.academy/tools/content-provenance-checker/records/CPS-2026-0027-who-answers-for-a-false-manifest
MLA
"Who answers for a manifest that is signed and false?." Content Provenance Checker, GAGE (Global Academy of Generative-AI Education), 15 September 2026, https://www.gage.academy/tools/content-provenance-checker/records/CPS-2026-0027-who-answers-for-a-false-manifest.
Chicago
GAGE (Global Academy of Generative-AI Education). "Who answers for a manifest that is signed and false?." Content Provenance Checker. Last modified 15 September 2026. https://www.gage.academy/tools/content-provenance-checker/records/CPS-2026-0027-who-answers-for-a-false-manifest.
Permalink
https://www.gage.academy/tools/content-provenance-checker/records/CPS-2026-0027-who-answers-for-a-false-manifest

Last updated . Every record re verified . The ledger is checked monthly, first Monday, and the same day for any C2PA specification release.

Back to the full ledger, or every record for Global and every open question record.

GAGE briefings tell you which AI regulation deadlines are coming, what they actually require of you, and when a program opens.

Powered by GAGE, free EU AI Act tools from the Global Academy of Generative-AI Education
CallEmailHelp