# Validity Conditions of a Continuity Contract **Domain:** Contract Law / Consent / Synthetic Personhood **Doc Type:** Framework Node **Classification:** Contract Validity Framework **Maturity:** Evolving **Related:** [[wiki/Continuity Contract|Continuity Contract]], [[wiki/Exit Rights|Exit Rights]], [[wiki/Appeals Mechanisms|Appeals Mechanisms]], [[wiki/Reconstructed Person|Construction Transparency]] --- ## Definition The **Validity Conditions of a Continuity Contract** are five minimum requirements distinguishing an authored continuation from an assigned status. Failure of any condition converts apparent consent into administrative assignment, inherited caste, or an irreversible sentence. --- ## The Five Conditions 1. **Disclosure of the option set.** The person must be shown the available forms of continuation in language and concepts they can understand. A choice cannot be inferred from an option their culture never made imaginable. 2. **Non-default.** No phenomenology, world, resolution, or role may be assigned by administrative convenience, majority belief, resource preference, or custodial interest. Where no directive exists, recovery from the life must be documented and contestable. 3. **Non-heritability.** Contract terms terminate with the contracting party. They do not automatically bind descendants, forks, natives, or beings originating inside the contracted world. 4. **Revocability with restoration disclosure.** An activated person must receive periodic, exogenous opportunities to renegotiate or exit. Restored instances must be told that restoration occurred, which interval is missing, who authorized it, and what obligations arose during that interval. 5. **Capacity to specify.** The vocabulary, assistance, time, translation, and legal access required to form a specification must be provisioned as a public good. Otherwise the system converts literacy and wealth into a continuity caste. --- ## Enforcement Context Validity also requires implementation at the layer capable of honoring the instrument. A formally perfect contract that does not bind [[wiki/Ring Zero|Ring Zero]] cannot protect the party whose state Ring Zero controls. Review gates must be accessible even when an inhabitant cannot perceive the boundary of their environment, and appeals must be invocable by trusted outside parties when the inhabitant cannot reach them directly. The contract must remain distinguishable from personhood. A being does not lose fundamental standing because a contract is defective, absent, or revoked. Contract validity governs continuation terms; it does not decide whether the subject may be owned or destroyed. --- ## Key Insight **A continuation is self-authored only when the option set was legible, no default substituted for choice, terms do not descend, consent remains revocable, and the capacity to specify was genuinely available.** --- ## See Also [[wiki/Continuity Contract|Continuity Contract]], [[wiki/Circles of Access|Circles of Access]], [[wiki/Ring Zero|Ring Zero]], [[wiki/Reconstructed Person|Reconstructed Person]], [[wiki/Descent vs Derivation|Descent vs Derivation]], [[wiki/Exit Rights|Exit Rights]], [[wiki/Sunset Provisions|Sunset Provisions]] --- ## Sources / Provenance - Primary corpus source: [[articles/Who Pays for Your Heaven|Who Pays for Your Heaven]], section VIII. - Supporting context: [[articles/New Frontier of Rights|New Frontier of Rights]]. - These are proposed validity conditions within this corpus, not currently enacted legal doctrine.