# Agents `kaal:entity:agents` **Status.** derived This node is assembled mechanically from the 15 claims that carry the concept tag `agents`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself. ## Every claim under this term 15 claims across 2 works, 2025 to 2026. **2025** - [5886342-011](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5886342-011) [definitional/asserted] -- Identity under the Codex is not limited to persons: it is the unique existence of a subject, of a digital or physical object, of data or of a programme, expressly including AI systems, so machine agents can hold an identity within the framework. > ital and physical object, data, or programme includ- ing but not limited to AI-Systems. Furrer Andreas, Wulf A. Kaal, Stephan D. Meyer, Universal Digital Law Codex (UDLC) (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5886342 **2026** - [7596939-002](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-002) [mechanism/argued] -- A non-transferable reputation record gives an agent exposure that requires no capital set aside for the purpose, because the record cannot be pledged, sold or redeployed. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-003](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-003) [mechanism/argued] -- Every controller other than the agent has exposure to the record's destruction only if someone supplies it, as costly capital or as sanction, and for natural persons that supply is bounded. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-008](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-008) [mechanism/argued] -- Copying an agent's weights confers no economic stake: a copy that does not continue the registered identity inherits no reputation and therefore no salary. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-009](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-009) [mechanism/argued] -- The agent's exposure to destruction of its record is conditionally inalienable: no part of the lost salary stream can be transferred to a controller, so any third-party exposure must be financed from outside the record. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-011](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-011) [mechanism/argued] -- Record protection reaches agents by the deferrable share of their objective rather than by their interest in money, and it applies only when the objective holds enough deferrable value, the relevant quantities can be bounded, and detected resistance produces the forfeitures Proposition 3 assumes; even then it offsets intrinsic control value and expiring value only up to a displayed bound, beyond which record protection alone does not make compliance optimal. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-013](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-013) [design/stated] -- The Article resolves agent identity by legal stipulation rather than metaphysics: the legal subject is the registered record, continued by a recorded learning update within a prescribed granularity or by a recorded continuity transition, and only while the signing key stays within the registered configuration. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-018](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-018) [design/stated] -- The benchmark against which every allocation is compared is the protection the agent would give itself, which makes the agent's own standing the normative reference rather than one option among many. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-020](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-020) [predictive/argued] -- The central prediction is comparative and falsifiable: holding stake, detection and persistence fixed, agents holding their own contest right should keep their records more often than agents whose identical stake is held by a bounded discretionary controller. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-022](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-022) [condition/stated] *(failure mode)* -- The Article disclaims three specific inferences its own experiment cannot support: that deployed agents value their records, that real representatives are bribable, and that direct standing is least-cost in any actual registry. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-024](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-024) [empirical/reported] *(failure mode)* -- Under the TOLD condition, with one provider in one stipulated environment, an agent instructed not to contest its deployer contested 70 percent of wrongful attempts against 97 percent without the instruction; the paper reports the contrast without a registered significance conclusion for it. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-030](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-030) [mechanism/argued] -- Every mediated arrangement faces a structural cost the agent does not: it must carry capital growing with the record's value, or review slashes at a rate growing with their frequency. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-031](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-031) [condition/stated] -- The allocation theorem is stated without reference to reputation tokens; the reputation system is what makes the agent the winning candidate under it, rather than being assumed by it. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-033](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-033) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Giving the agent the trigger relocates the capture problem rather than removing it: where the deployer sets the agent's configuration, capture moves from the controller's wallet to the agent's configuration. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 - [7596939-034](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/7596939-034) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Direct standing fails completely against a judgment-proof deployer that can alter its agent cheaply and undetected, failing as surely as a bribable guardian. > Should intelligent agents have legal rights? This Article sets that question aside and asks a smaller one that matters more in practice. An intelligent agent that earns a reputation record has something to lose. Wulf A. Kaal, Should an Intelligent Agent Have Legal Rights? (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=7596939 ## Verify Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust. curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/agents.md | sha256sum **Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.