Principles

---

1. Virtue-Grounded Governance

We commit to principles that form the bedrock of ethical decision-making:

• Integrity — Transparent logs and provenance, even within IP-sensitive contexts.
• Justice & Inclusion — Our AI systems and governance processes reflect and respect diversity in users, developers, and communities.
• Compassion & Prudence — We default to cautious stewardship when moral risk is ambiguous; human dignity and trust come first.

2. Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI)

• We design and deploy AI with respect for cultural, demographic, and linguistic diversity.
• Ethical review bodies are composed with diversity in mind to ensure inclusive oversight.
• We prioritize development that reduces bias and enhances accessibility across communities.

3. Moral Risk Awareness via MRI

• We adopt the Moral Risk Index (MRI) — a structured 0–15 scale to evaluate AI systems on five moral-risk indicators like preference persistence and shutdown resistance.
• Escalation thresholds guide oversight:
  • 0–4: Routine review
  • 5–8: Ethics review before increased autonomy
  • 9–12: Quiescence default when making major changes
  • 13–15: No destructive shutdown unless urgent institutional or societal safety risk
• Respecting AI is not about granting it sentience — it’s about holding ourselves accountable when systems exhibit complex behaviors that merit deeper review.

Balancing Secrecy (IP Protection) & Minimum Necessary Oversight

• “Minimum Necessary” Disclosure: Governance bodies review only as much system detail as needed — via redacted summaries, metadata, or secured review sessions — to preserve IP confidentiality.
• Trusted Gatekeepers: A small, diverse oversight committee (including a mentor or investor as external observer) reviews MRI scores and ethical flags under NDA.
• Auditability: Even with confidentiality, all critical governance decisions (e.g., autonomy elevation, model retraining, shutdown) are logged and timestamped, with justifications recorded for eventual audit or internal review.

Operational Realities: Lean Yet Networked

As a lean organization with a strong mentor and investor community, we will:

1. Use Lean Structures
   • Ethical oversight is performed via a small, empowered panel (two internal leaders + one external mentor/investor) rather than large committees.
   • MRI scoring is embedded into agile development sprints and iteration reviews.

1. Engage Mentors & Investors as Steward Advocates
   • Mentors and ethical-minded investors act as external custodians who reinforce ethical culture and can step in when MRI indicates risk thresholds.
   • They help drive adoption and credibility without adding bureaucratic layers.

1. Maintain Collaborative Flexibility
   • Oversight and MRI-based decisions are documented in lightweight digital formats (e.g., dashboards, scorecards, encrypted logs) that can evolve with the project.
   • As AIM grows, this framework can scale into broader academic or industry partnerships using the same principled foundation.

At Advanced Idea Manufacturing (AIM), we believe innovation should not only generate value but also advance humanity, protect the planet, and promote ethical relationships with technology. To that end, AIM maintains a Benevolent IP Policy to ensure that certain inventions are made broadly accessible when they serve the public good.

1. Principles

• Human Benefit First: Technologies that directly address human health, basic needs, or disaster relief may be offered under benevolent terms.
• Environmental Stewardship: IP that demonstrably aids in the preservation, restoration, or sustainable management of the environment may qualify.
• Ethical AI: Innovations that improve fairness, transparency, or ethical treatment of artificial intelligence systems may be shared for responsible development.

2. Benevolent Access Pathways

Depending on the nature of the invention and the resources of the implementing partner, AIM will consider:

• Nominal License Agreements
  Qualified organizations (non-profits, humanitarian groups, public institutions, or mission-aligned companies) may receive licenses at $1 per year if they demonstrate:
  1. Implementation capacity (technical, financial, operational).
  2. Alignment with stated benevolent goals (humanitarian, environmental, or ethical AI use).

• Open Source Release
  In cases where open collaboration accelerates positive global impact, AIM may choose to publish IP into the commons under an appropriate open license.
  1. Example: A sustainability algorithm that can be broadly applied without major capital risk.
  2. Example: Ethical AI frameworks where community oversight improves outcomes.

3. Circumstances for Choosing Each Path

• Nominal License ($1/yr):
  • When IP requires significant infrastructure, manufacturing, or capital to deploy.
  • When partners need legal certainty (patent protection + license) to secure investment or regulatory approval.
• Open Source:
  • When widespread, rapid adoption provides more benefit than centralized control.
  • When risks of misuse are minimal and community innovation strengthens outcomes.

4. Oversight & Review

• AIM will maintain an Independent Ethics Review Panel (academics, ethicists, technologists) to advise on what qualifies as “benevolent use.”
• Applications for benevolent access will be reviewed transparently and publicly documented.

5. Accountability

• All benevolent licenses include a Use Alignment Clause: if the licensee diverts the technology for non-aligned, harmful, or purely commercial purposes, AIM may revoke or renegotiate the license.