{
 "@context": "https://schema.org",
 "@type": "Claim",
 "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-186",
 "identifier": "kaal:position:2026-08-08-186",
 "additionalType": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/schema.json#AffirmedPositionClaim",
 "name": "Streaming When Agentic Ai Met The Common Law Of Agency 7F78Eba163",
 "text": "When Agentic AI Met the Common Law of Agency argues that the common-law definition of agency does not plausibly apply to agentic AI. This qualifies Kaal's framework-level representation mechanism: a Legal Identity can authorize delegated and automated action, but technical attribution does not by itself give an AI system common-law capacity as an agent. The abstract separately notes that apparent-authority doctrines may still attach consequences.",
 "author": {
  "@type": "Person",
  "name": "Wulf A. Kaal",
  "identifier": "https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7840-1847"
 },
 "datePublished": "2026-08-08",
 "dateModified": "2026-08-08",
 "creativeWorkStatus": "Affirmed",
 "responseType": "qualification",
 "keywords": [
  "citation-and-knowledge",
  "ai-and-agents",
  "historical-response",
  "scholarly-literature",
  "crossref"
 ],
 "scope_conditions": [
  "The response is limited to the retrieved source proposition and mapped Kaal claim unless fuller source review supports a broader conclusion.",
  "External evidence level: abstract indexed.",
  "Mapping review tier: substantively reviewed abstract-level qualification.",
  "Primary mapping confidence: 0.62.",
  "The primary mapping cleared the automated ambiguity test; substantive scope remains review-bound.",
  "Evidence is limited to an exact proposition in a Crossref-indexed abstract; full text was not reviewed.",
  "No relationship is treated as external endorsement, citation, causation, or validation of a broader Kaal claim.",
  "The source argues that the common-law definition of agency does not plausibly apply to agentic AI. This qualifies Kaal's framework-level representation mechanism: a Legal Identity can authorize delegated and automated action, but that technical attribution does not by itself give the AI system common-law capacity as an agent; the same abstract separately notes that apparent-authority doctrines may still attach consequences."
 ],
 "currentDebate": {
  "name": "When Agentic AI Met the Common Law of Agency",
  "url": "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6838660"
 },
 "extends": {
  "identifier": "kaal:claim:5886342-014",
  "url": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5886342-014",
  "citation": "Furrer Andreas, Wulf A. Kaal, Stephan D. Meyer, Universal Digital Law Codex (UDLC) (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5886342",
  "paper": "Furrer Andreas, Wulf A. Kaal, Stephan D. Meyer, Universal Digital Law Codex (UDLC)",
  "authors": [
   "Wulf A. Kaal"
  ],
  "year": "2025",
  "ssrn": "https://ssrn.com/abstract=5886342",
  "source_pdf_sha256": "dc456a1ce2ea4a356dbcb35dc900ec36be94b8c9b6da4a2c8c268d6301f66359"
 },
 "isBasedOn": [
  {
   "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5886342-014"
  },
  {
   "@type": "CreativeWork",
   "name": "When Agentic AI Met the Common Law of Agency",
   "url": "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6838660"
  }
 ],
 "batch_id": "kaal-review:2026-08-08:continuous-crossref-0016-all-0007-reviewed-v1",
 "review_provenance": "https://kaal-signal-desk.wulf577462.chatgpt.site/#review",
 "publicationStatus": "public",
 "recordTypeNote": "Dated commentary position extending a scholarly corpus claim. Not a verbatim claim extracted from the paper.",
 "isPartOf": {
  "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/index.json"
 },
 "version": "1.0",
 "canonical_url": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-186",
 "canonicalForm": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-186.md",
 "candidateId": "kaal:response-draft:2026-08-08:81b038f1b2659b52f9a6",
 "evidenceLevel": "abstract indexed",
 "reviewTier": "substantively reviewed abstract-level qualification",
 "mappingConfidence": 0.62,
 "mappingAmbiguous": false,
 "mappingMethod": "complete-corpus source-proposition mechanism and scope adjudication",
 "mappingWhyRelevant": "The source argues that the common-law definition of agency does not plausibly apply to agentic AI. This qualifies Kaal's framework-level representation mechanism: a Legal Identity can authorize delegated and automated action, but that technical attribution does not by itself give the AI system common-law capacity as an agent; the same abstract separately notes that apparent-authority doctrines may still attach consequences.",
 "sourceProvenance": {
  "source": "crossref",
  "sourceRecordId": "10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
  "queryId": "concept:cff87b653032",
  "queryText": "agentic commerce",
  "canonicalUrl": "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
  "doi": "10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
  "externalIds": {
   "DOI": "10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
   "Crossref": "10.2139/ssrn.6838660"
  },
  "retrievedAt": "2026-08-09T13:13:37.411Z",
  "providerPage": 1,
  "rawObservationSha256": "aed39b69b8ff7edde7369308f0927554fbaa1faabeaf66b67de916e115b33f1b",
  "inputSnapshotSha256": "a48432bb7fc3eca7314e30bcfdc9ddb3c968d9da4caa74dce55ad51e15a1ec9a",
  "inputLine": 7821,
  "chunkId": "crossref-00001",
  "workId": "work:doi:10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
  "workAuthors": [
   "Deborah DeMott"
  ],
  "workPublishedAt": "2026-01-01",
  "identityKeys": [
   "doi:10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
   "crossref:10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
   "url:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
   "title:3d7504eff5a72023666b6d21",
   "proposition:6d805ad779dcd59388adc46cd2cb57ceb68475872107f0c6f217e2ff2e418f0e"
  ],
  "sourceProposition": "The common law definition of an agency relationship does not plausibly apply to agentic AI.",
  "sourcePropositionSha256": "46cd818cf0a0cae8656311b1489e976d47b28316ff52fb2870680df1b0cab280",
  "sourcePropositionIndex": 0,
  "claimMappings": [
   {
    "claimId": "kaal:claim:5886342-014",
    "claimUrl": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5886342-014",
    "rank": 1,
    "confidence": 0.62,
    "method": "complete-corpus source-proposition mechanism and scope adjudication",
    "whyRelevant": "The source argues that the common-law definition of agency does not plausibly apply to agentic AI. This qualifies Kaal's framework-level representation mechanism: a Legal Identity can authorize delegated and automated action, but that technical attribution does not by itself give the AI system common-law capacity as an agent; the same abstract separately notes that apparent-authority doctrines may still attach consequences.",
    "ambiguous": false
   }
  ],
  "substantiveReview": {
   "disposition": "retained",
   "reviewVersion": "kaal-continuous-crossref-substantive-review-v1",
   "reviewedAt": "2026-08-10T00:21:58.476Z",
   "reviewer": "Codex continuous substantive reviewer",
   "rationale": "The source argues that the common-law definition of agency does not plausibly apply to agentic AI. This qualifies Kaal's framework-level representation mechanism: a Legal Identity can authorize delegated and automated action, but that technical attribution does not by itself give the AI system common-law capacity as an agent; the same abstract separately notes that apparent-authority doctrines may still attach consequences.",
   "limitations": [
    "Evidence is limited to an exact proposition in a Crossref-indexed abstract; full text was not reviewed.",
    "No relationship is treated as external endorsement, citation, causation, or validation of a broader Kaal claim.",
    "The source argues that the common-law definition of agency does not plausibly apply to agentic AI. This qualifies Kaal's framework-level representation mechanism: a Legal Identity can authorize delegated and automated action, but that technical attribution does not by itself give the AI system common-law capacity as an agent; the same abstract separately notes that apparent-authority doctrines may still attach consequences."
   ],
   "sourceIdentity": {
    "status": "verified",
    "source": "Crossref REST work record",
    "doi": "10.2139/ssrn.6838660",
    "title": "When Agentic AI Met the Common Law of Agency",
    "authors": [
     "Deborah DeMott"
    ],
    "language": "unavailable",
    "publisher": "Elsevier BV",
    "checkedAt": "2026-08-10T00:21:58.476Z",
    "responseBodySha256": "7662ba48c3f28651fe27d4bd09b6e75a97978ac1a566a3ab5d384b029e2cd5cf",
    "providerReceipt": {
     "path": "outputs/historical-backfill-2026-08-08-crossref/raw-receipts/crossref-016-00001.json",
     "sha256": "7599a5e75fb48a69ca7a5bb3074aed79cccbcd4aa6595b4042dcec6a7eddad00",
     "byteLength": 2485401
    }
   },
   "independentRationale": "The exact proposition is present in the live Crossref abstract and the deposited reference list contains no Kaal-authored reference; the relationship is limited to the independently stated proposition.",
   "nonOverlap": {
    "candidateIdMatches": 0,
    "canonicalUrlMatches": 0,
    "propositionHashMatches": 0
   }
  }
 },
 "userAffirmation": "Automatically authorized under standing authority receipt kaal-standing-publication-authorization:2026-08-01:hourly-reviewed-batches, SHA-256 e2126054b58bb4e88db65c334ef4fc8ae78dcaadc63543c408133c4eefceb9b1, limited to this substantively reviewed batch and the unchanged 5,033 scholarly claims.",
 "sha256": "1fed238dfc7b04b781c05d1da7f6261ef1c9af940cfb0d9588c0126f83771616"
}