HOST://protocol

FutureCraft is building the resolution layer for global construction - the layer in which context, complexity, and the means of acting on them are brought into a single pipeline that anyone with the standing to inspect it can inspect. The charter that follows is the ethics charter for that work. It is not aspirational language. It is the set of commitments under which the platform operates, and under which everyone associated with FutureCraft - the core team, contributors, city partners, manufacturers, architects, engineers, advisors - is expected to operate. The four commitments are Honesty, Openness, Safety, and Trust. They are operational rather than ornamental, and the rest of this document specifies what each means in practice.

§ The stakes

A resolution layer is not a neutral piece of infrastructure. What it resolves becomes the city. The questions the platform has to answer well are therefore questions cities and residents have a direct stake in: how AI participates in the design of structures people will live in, what it means that the loop of the built environment finally closes - that data from inside, about, and around buildings flows back into the layer that builds the next ones, sharpening designs, making the city-scale transition to sustainable energy tractable rather than aspirational, and improving the resolution of need-in-context over time - how the design commons stays attributed and improvable at scale, how carbon is counted, how the relationship with city partners stays straight when those cities are also the regulator. None of these is solved by good intentions. Each is solved, or fails to be solved, by what the platform actually does at the point the question arises. This charter is the document that says, in advance, what the platform will do.

The point on city data is worth dwelling on, because it is constitutive of the rest. Cities have spent two decades being told their data sovereignty is something to be negotiated for, ringfenced, or rained down from the clouds of whichever platform was hosting it. The premise FutureCraft starts from is the inverse: data sovereignty is not pleaded for, it is built up from the foundations. By the city, in the city, for the city. The Context Resolver runs on standards that keep city data where it belongs - in the city's own data space, in the city's native format, governed by the city as part of its overall data strategy. Cities do not connect their data to other cities' data; they keep their own and connect through the layer above it, by exchanging practices, sharing patterns into the design commons, and learning from each other's projects. The new world here is not one in which a platform owns the data and promises to behave. It is one in which cities own their data, and FutureCraft is the layer that closes the loop - between data and design, between projects and patterns, between what cities know about their built environment and what gets built next.

It exists now rather than later because the platform is being built now rather than later. The configurations the resolver stack releases today will be the configurations the resolver stack releases tomorrow, only more of them and into more contexts. Carbon accounting that lets some uncertainty in at the start lets more uncertainty in at scale. A commons whose attribution is loose at ten thousand patterns is unrecoverable at a hundred thousand. A foundation laid honestly compounds in the cities' favour. A foundation laid loosely compounds against them. The cost of getting this right is paid early. The cost of getting it wrong is paid by the cities and residents who trusted the platform to get it right.

Some of what follows is in response to conditions already visible. Roughly 1.1 billion people now live in informal settlements; in the fastest-growing cities, the majority of urban dwellings are built outside formal channels altogether. Of the European Union's €378 billion cohesion envelope for 2021 to 2027, only eleven percent had been spent by mid-2025; in England and Wales, more than £9 billion of developer contributions sits unused in local authority accounts. This is not a funding crisis - it is a conditions crisis, and platforms that resolve those conditions at scale will set the terms for the construction sector for a generation. FutureCraft is one such platform, and the charter is the document by which we accept the responsibility that comes with it.

This charter applies to every person and entity collaborating with or associated with FutureCraft (a FutureCraft Stakeholder), across all FutureCraft bodies: the OÜ, the Digital Housing Commons Foundation, HACC programmes, and any regional or thematic working group operating under the FutureCraft umbrella. Every stakeholder is expected to read it, commit to it, take ownership of their decisions under it, and raise questions or concerns - before or after signing - through the designated integrity contact. Lead by example. Do not delegate your ethics. Never take shortcuts on integrity for speed, funding, or scale.

§ Integrity infrastructure

Ethics at FutureCraft is a practice rather than a document. An open ecosystem attracts genuine contributors and, inevitably, actors whose interests do not align with the mission. FutureCraft is aware that its model - open-source, commons-based, structurally independent of incumbent industry - may be perceived as disruptive by established interests. Due diligence, input integrity, and enforcement are calibrated accordingly.

• Risk assessment and due diligence. Screening is applied to existing and incoming stakeholders, continuously, at both global and local levels. Stakeholders are expected to support these processes in their respective capacity.
• Speak-up culture. FutureCraft maintains internal reporting lines for suggestions, concerns, and observations, and has appointed an independent, impartial expert to receive and address sensitive matters in confidence. Active speak-up lines are a sign of a healthy organisation, not a failing one.
• Reporting channels. Internal contact: TBD. Independent integrity line: TBD.

Breach of this protocol may result in suspension or revocation of platform access, termination of partnership agreements, revocation of certification, or referral to relevant authorities - proportionate to severity. A detailed Enforcement Annex specifying breach definitions, investigation processes, response rights, and consequence ladders will be incorporated by reference upon Board adoption. Until that annex is adopted, interim enforcement authority rests with the CEO in consultation with the Ethics Officer. Any stakeholder subject to an enforcement action retains the right to be heard and to appeal to the Board. Enforcement actions and their outcomes are documented and reported to the Board quarterly.

Inaccurate inputs follow a correction track: notification of the submitting party, opportunity to correct, and reassessment. Persistent or negligent inaccuracy may result in suspension of platform access. Knowing and deliberate misrepresentation follows a separate enforcement track: immediate suspension, revocation of certification, recovery of the delta and correction costs (see Input integrity, under Safety), and - in egregious cases - referral to authorities at the Board's discretion. The distinction between error and fraud is determined by investigation; the correction opportunity applies only to the former.

H. Honesty

FutureCraft operates as a for-profit company running a non-profit commons in the public interest. That dual structure creates opportunity for every participant - manufacturers gain direct presence in resolved demand, cities access permit-ready specifications at a marginal cost approaching zero, contributors build on a platform with global reach. But it only works if everyone is straightforward about interests, incentives, and intentions. Honesty here is not a posture. It is the precondition of the model.

No conflicts of interest

Act in FutureCraft's interest, which means the public interest - the cities, communities, and people the platform serves. Prevent and disclose conflicts proactively. Disclose any material conflict - in function, loyalty, relationship, or financial interest - through the COI Disclosure Form. A conflict is material when it involves a financial interest above €1,000, a competing role or employment, a family or close personal relationship with a counterparty, or any situation where a reasonable observer would question your impartiality. Routine, low-level potential overlaps do not require formal disclosure but should be mentioned to your FutureCraft contact if in doubt. Avoid positions, functions, or loyalties that may conflict - or appear to conflict - with your FutureCraft responsibilities. Do not seek personal or commercial gain through your FutureCraft role. A conflict of interest is only a problem if it is undisclosed and unaddressed. Transparency is the standard. Turning a blind eye is itself a breach.

No bribery, no gifts, no favouritism

Do not give, receive, solicit, or offer - directly or indirectly - any bribe, facilitation payment, gift, or favour that could constitute or appear to constitute an improper advantage. Gifts or hospitality below €100 in value, offered transparently and without expectation of reciprocity, are normal business courtesy and not covered by this provision. Above that threshold, or where any doubt exists about intent, disclose and seek guidance. Do not use unverified intermediaries. Report any inappropriate demand immediately.

Clean funding, no fraud, no money laundering

FutureCraft is committed to financial integrity at every level. This means accurate, complete, and honest records and information; verified sourcing of all funds - including KYC, KYP, and UBO checks; and no transactions that directly or indirectly involve criminality, sanctions, or embargoes.

Fair competition

The platform exists precisely so that competing manufacturers, contractors, and service providers can coexist within the same demand-resolution layer. That coexistence is a feature, not a bug; it is what makes the resolution layer valuable. But it only works if no participant can capture, distort, or monopolise access. Anti-competitive behaviour - cartels, price-fixing, market allocation, abuse of a dominant position within the ecosystem - is prohibited. Competing stakeholders must not share, discuss, or agree on competitively sensitive information such as pricing, margins, R&D strategies, or territory allocation. The Digital Housing Commons and its tools must remain fair, transparent, and accessible. Terms of participation are objective and non-discriminatory.

O. Openness

Openness is not a value FutureCraft happens to hold. It is the mechanism through which the platform creates value at all. A closed version of this work would resolve nothing; the resolution layer derives its accuracy from the openness of the data spaces it runs against, the openness of the design commons it draws on, the openness of the configurator that accesses it, and the openness of the output it produces. Four things are open by commitment:

• The city data spaces. What is open is the standard - ETSI NGSI-LD - the architecture, and the interoperability through which the Context Resolver queries the data. What the data itself contains, and which parts of it are public, restricted, or sensitive, is sovereign to the city. Some city context data is genuinely open (zoning, codes, published infrastructure); some is not, and is not meant to be. The platform respects the classification the city sets, and operates against each accordingly.
• The Digital Housing Commons. The repository of attributed design patterns - the atomic unit of resolution - is free to contribute to, attributed to its authors, and improvable by anyone with the standing and skill to do so. Forking is part of how it grows.
• The configurator. The FutureCraft configurator and its chat interface, the two access surfaces by which need-in-context meets the resolver stack, are free and open to architects, cities, engineers, schools, students, and citizens.
• The output. The resolution that leaves the platform - native BIM files, fabrication-ready geometry, bills of material, carbon and compliance artefacts - is downloadable, inspectable, and interoperable. The value is not file ownership. It is the validated resolution that produced the file.

That said, openness has to be matched by transparency in how the rest of the work is conducted. The provisions that follow specify what openness obliges of FutureCraft and its stakeholders beyond the four open commitments above.

Transparency and accountability

Except for legitimately confidential information (see below), FutureCraft promotes transparency in its values, vision, decisions, and actions. Every stakeholder takes ownership of their decisions and commits to honest, timely communication - first to the CEO and Board, then to relevant stakeholders and, where appropriate, the public. You are accountable for your compliance with this charter, including the conduct of people you supervise or collaborate with.

Intellectual property and assets

FutureCraft's assets include human capital, infrastructure, IT resources, financial resources, and intellectual property - names, trademarks, logos, copyrights, databases, proprietary information, and patentable innovation. Open-source outputs of the Digital Housing Commons are governed by their respective licences (Creative Commons and similar). FutureCraft retains the role of operator of the HOST ledger and of the carbon verification methodology applied to physical products built from DHC-originated designs. All other FutureCraft IP requires prior express approval for use.

Open-source governance at scale

As the Digital Housing Commons grows, governance has to grow with it. Designs released into the commons can be forked, adapted, and deployed across jurisdictions with different building codes, climate conditions, and structural requirements. This is by design; it is how open source scales. But it introduces distributed responsibility that must be addressed explicitly.

• FutureCraft backs only what it has validated. Architectural stability, regulatory compliance, and structural integrity are assured only for configurations the resolver stack has resolved and the Perspicuity Resolver has released with a supporting state - valid, or conditional with named assumptions. Expired and non-admissible configurations are not backed. Configurations that depart from validated parameters fall outside FutureCraft's scope; the modifying party assumes responsibility for structural validation and regulatory compliance in their local context.
• Forking is how the commons grows. The expected behaviour when forking a DHC design is: (i) the fork is made public - no silent forks; (ii) FutureCraft is notified, as the platform's role in operating the carbon verification methodology and the HOST ledger continues to apply to DHC-originated designs and their derivatives; (iii) the forked design can be submitted to the same ingest process as new contributions. Authorship is sticky at the pattern level. Derivative designs must carry forward the original licence terms (Creative Commons attribution and share-alike, or as specified per design). Forking does not extinguish attribution, does not remove FutureCraft's role in carbon verification for resulting physical products, and does not permit commercialisation of DHC-originated IP outside the licence terms.
• Provenance is auditable. The DHC develops and maintains clear versioning, attribution, and deviation-tracking, so that the modification history of any design can be reconstructed by anyone with the standing to inspect it.
• Foundries hold standards. Foundries within the DHC - particularly the Hackable Architecture Foundry and the Interoperable Fabrication Foundry - are responsible for developing and evolving the governance standards as the contributor base expands.

Openness without governance is negligence. FutureCraft treats commons governance as a core operational function, not an afterthought.

Confidentiality

Confidential, sensitive, or proprietary information about FutureCraft must be protected. Prevent unauthorised disclosure or misuse - internally and externally. Apply minimisation and proportionality: do not access or request information beyond what your role requires. Adopt robust cybersecurity measures, monitor access, and detect incidents promptly.

Safe reporting and whistleblowing

Nobody is perfect. FutureCraft maintains safe channels for raising concerns, reporting dilemmas, and flagging risks. A no-retaliation policy protects anyone who speaks up in good faith. Reporting lines include the immediate FutureCraft contact, the FutureCraft Ethics Officer, and an independent, confidential integrity line. Stakeholders must actively prevent intimidation or deterrence of good-faith reporting. Equally, the reporting system must not be weaponised: reports made in bad faith - to harass, to gain competitive advantage, or to create administrative burden - are themselves a breach. The Ethics Officer applies proportionate triage; not every concern requires a formal investigation, and the response is calibrated to severity and credibility.

S. Safety

Safety at FutureCraft extends well beyond physical security. It covers democratic governance, digital sovereignty, the responsible deployment of AI and robotics, regulatory compliance, and the integrity of the inputs on which the resolver stack depends. These provisions exist because a platform that cities trust with construction data and procurement processes, manufacturers trust with calibration of their product data, and architects trust with the attribution of their work has to earn that trust through verifiable safeguards rather than promises.

Democratic governance

FutureCraft's internal governance is driven by openness, inclusiveness, and fair representation. Every stakeholder has a voice. The platform is structurally independent of political cycles and ideologies: the mechanics are open-source, participation is voluntary, and value creation runs through cooperation around a shared infrastructure rather than competition over proprietary capture of it. The model serves any jurisdiction regardless of political orientation. No FutureCraft activity shall be construed as favouring a regime, political party, or ideological position. The value proposition is grounded in physics, economics, and open access - that is not a political position, it is observable fact.

FutureCraft may screen, refuse, or exclude stakeholders, initiatives, or funding that involve or condone non-democratic environments, where this would prejudice FutureCraft's mission and values. Such determinations are made by the Board on a case-by-case basis, informed by due diligence, with reference to applicable international standards, and with documented reasoning.

Digital sovereignty and data governance

FutureCraft operates across jurisdictions with different data regimes. Digital sovereignty here means three concrete things. City and regional data remains under the governance of the originating authority; FutureCraft facilitates interoperability, it does not claim ownership of municipal or citizen data. Data spaces, digital twins, and AI-generated outputs follow open standards and are governed transparently within the Digital Housing Commons framework. Personal data is processed in compliance with GDPR and equivalent frameworks - data minimisation, purpose limitation, and informed consent are non-negotiable.

What does sit at the FutureCraft level is different in kind from city data and is governed accordingly. The Digital Housing Commons holds attributed design patterns under open licences - their value is precisely that they are public, contributable, and improvable. The HOST ledger holds carbon entries against verified projects - their value is precisely that they are openly auditable. Neither is an aggregated city dataset. The platform team maintains validation checks, model calibration, and methodology over the work the resolvers do, and the data used for that calibration comes from configurator outputs and verified project records that are already public artefacts of the commons. City context data remains in the city's data space; what FutureCraft learns from the operation of the platform is learned from the public layer, not from a proprietary pool of city-by-city data. Where any change in how the public artefacts of the commons or the ledger are used would materially affect contributors, city partners, or data providers, that change requires consultation with the affected parties and Board approval, and protections established at the point of onboarding cannot be weakened retroactively.

AI ethics and responsible deployment

FutureCraft uses AI to ingest and structure context, to resolve complexity, and to translate resolution into perspicuous output. The ethics of how AI participates in the resolver stack are structural, not peripheral, because the stack is what stands behind the configurations the platform releases.

• Human oversight. AI augments professional judgment, it does not replace accountability. Every configuration that enters a certification or procurement pathway has a defined human review point, and the point at which human judgment is applied is documented and auditable. The Perspicuity Resolver enforces this at the point of release: configurations leave the platform only with a state that supports the decision they are entering.
• Algorithmic transparency. Stakeholders and city partners can understand how the resolvers reach their recommendations. Black-box optimisation is not acceptable for decisions affecting structural safety, regulatory compliance, or resource allocation. The resolver stack is built on open standards - NGSI-LD, COMPAS, BHoM - precisely so that the working language of the resolution remains inspectable.
• Accountability chain. When the resolver stack produces a configuration, the accountability chain is explicit. FutureCraft is responsible for the integrity of the resolver stack and the verification methodology. The contributing architect or engineer is responsible for the professional validation of patterns they author. The local professional reviewing or adapting a configuration is responsible for its applicability to their context. The city authority is responsible for regulatory approval. FutureCraft does not allow any party to defer accountability to the algorithm.
• Environmental responsibility. Computational choices - model size, training frequency, inference infrastructure - consider energy and resource implications. Efficiency is an ethical constraint, not just an economic one.

Input integrity

The accountability chain and the carbon verification pipeline both depend on the quality of what enters the system, not only on the quality of what leaves it. In a distributed, multi-contributor platform operating across jurisdictions, corrupted inputs - a misspecified material, an inaccurate logistics record, an incorrect regulatory parameter - are the central failure mode. A single bad input can propagate through forked designs or HOST ledger entries before detection. FutureCraft therefore treats input integrity as an ethical obligation rather than a quality assurance function.

• Material specifications, structural parameters, and regulatory data entering the platform are validated at the point of submission against published standards, and cross-referenced where independent data sources exist.
• Validation responsibility is assigned explicitly: the submitting party is responsible for accuracy; the platform team is responsible for maintaining validation checks and flagging anomalies.
• Validation intervals are defined per input type. Critical inputs - material specifications, carbon calculation parameters - are validated at submission and re-validated when standards or source data are updated.
• When an input error is discovered after outputs have been acted upon - designs downloaded, ledger entries issued, buildings constructed - the platform's response is: notification to affected parties; recalculation and correction of platform data; flagging of affected ledger entries in the registry; and, where ledger entries have been issued against incorrect data, public disclosure as specified in the Carbon Verification Standard.
• The party that supplied inaccurate data is responsible for downstream consequences to their own business relationships, and is liable to FutureCraft for (a) the value of the delta between what was certified and what should have been, and (b) the reasonable costs incurred by FutureCraft in discovering, investigating, and correcting the error. FutureCraft's obligation is to maintain the integrity of the platform, not to compensate for errors in third-party inputs.

Robotics and the labour transition

FutureCraft operates at the intersection of digital design and physical fabrication. Robotic and automated fabrication is part of the platform's trajectory, and the consequences for construction labour are real - particularly in rapidly urbanising regions where many of our city partners operate. The position is straightforward: automation should augment human capacity, reduce hazardous labour, and improve build quality, not simply replace workers to reduce costs. Where FutureCraft's tools or designs are deployed in contexts involving significant labour displacement, we work with city partners to identify transition pathways - retraining programmes, new roles in digital fabrication, quality assurance, and maintenance of robotic systems. The HACC curriculum, developed in partnership with the wider architectural education community, includes digital fabrication literacy as a core component, so that the next generation of architects and builders can work alongside automated systems rather than be displaced by them. FutureCraft will not promote or enable automation strategies that its city partners have not reviewed and approved in their local context. The pace and scope of automation is a local decision, informed by global capabilities.

SDG alignment

The Sustainable Development Goals are not a branding exercise. FutureCraft Stakeholders stay current on SDG targets and integrate them into decision-making - particularly SDGs 3 (health), 9 (industry and innovation), 11 (sustainable cities), 12 (responsible consumption), and 13 (climate action).

Rule of law and regulatory compliance

FutureCraft stakeholders comply with all applicable laws - labour, privacy, safety, health, property, corporate governance. Where multiple legal frameworks apply, we follow the more protective standard. Human rights stand at the top of the hierarchy of norms for all FutureCraft activities, regardless of jurisdiction. Where local contract, liability, or IP law makes specific charter provisions unenforceable or contradictory, the affected stakeholder must disclose the conflict to FutureCraft before signing; FutureCraft and the stakeholder will agree a jurisdiction-specific annex that preserves the intent of the protocol to the maximum extent permitted by local law.

Unless otherwise agreed, disputes between FutureCraft and external parties are subject to the courts of Tallinn, Estonia, in English, or to an independent arbitration process accessible to concerned parties. Disputes between stakeholders - including inter-contributor disputes over forked designs, carbon attribution, or data use - are referred first to the FutureCraft Ethics Officer for mediation. If mediation fails, the matter is escalated to the Board for determination or referral to arbitration. FutureCraft acknowledges that the Ethics Officer function - mediation, breach reports, and complaint triage - will require structured resourcing as the platform scales, and commits to maintaining dispute resolution capacity proportionate to the contributor base.

Peace, no terrorism financing, no embargo violations

FutureCraft exists to build, not to enable destruction. We oppose all forms of violence and criminal activity. FutureCraft may screen and exclude stakeholders, initiatives, or transactions linked to terrorism, criminal activity, or subject to EU or UN sanctions and embargoes.

T. Trust

Trust is earned through consistency between what we say and what we do. For manufacturers, trust means the calibration of their product data into the resolver stack is fair, the basis on which they pay is honest, and their HOST ledger entries hold value. For cities, it means their data is governed as agreed. For architects, engineers, and contributors, it means their work is attributed and protected, and the share of platform income they earn against the patterns the resolvers draw on travels with the configuration. For the people the buildings serve, it means the building contains what the platform says it contains. FutureCraft is human-centric and open by design. Technology, data, and AI are only smart if they serve people and the planet.

Data and technology ethics

All technology FutureCraft develops, deploys, or facilitates must embed ethics and compliance by design. The detailed commitments on AI transparency, accountability, bias monitoring, and human oversight are specified under AI ethics and responsible deployment in the Safety section above. In addition: personal data protection and GDPR compliance in all data processing; governance mechanisms ensuring that ethics provisions are integrated into platform architecture, not applied as an afterthought; diverse teams in R&D, architecture, and product development; environmental impact assessment of technology and infrastructure choices; and no automation or facilitation of conflicts of interest, fraud, or anti-competitive behaviour.

Human rights and dignity

FutureCraft and the Digital Housing Commons exist to improve living conditions globally. We respect human rights as defined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights: liberty and security, free expression, free thought, health, privacy, family, free movement, no forced labour, and equality before the law. Where any FutureCraft initiative operates in a context where human rights may be at risk, dedicated due diligence must be completed before proceeding.

Climate, environment, and carbon integrity

We are in the business of building for the future - which means leaving a better world for the generations that will inhabit what we construct. FutureCraft stakeholders assess environmental impact before authorising initiatives, with particular attention to CO₂ emissions, biodiversity, circular materials, clean energy, and water.

The platform's approach to carbon is deliberately simple, and it is important to be precise about what it is and what it is not. The carbon FutureCraft counts is the physical substitution the platform actually causes - wood in place of cement, biological materials in place of mineral ones, sequestration measured against conservative baselines, calculated from configurator data, material specifications, logistics records, and satellite verification. That measurement is represented on the HOST ledger and is the unit of account through which manufacturers pay to have their verified product data calibrated into the resolver stack. Manufacturers are not buying placement; they are buying the right to be assessed properly inside real demand resolution. The price is set by physical impact. Money moves in money.

One thing the HOST ledger is not is a substitute for regulated carbon-credit certification. The platform does not propose itself as an alternative carbon-credit regime, and it does not participate in the voluntary carbon market in its current form.

Where projects also generate certified carbon value under existing regulated regimes, that certification is handled through recognised certification partners and accounted for through the same ledger. Whether and how certified carbon value is later valorised, by whom, and on what terms, is a question the platform expects to be in a position to answer responsibly at scale. Until then, the discipline is to count the physical substitution, account for it transparently, and let the rest follow. The integrity commitments that this rests on are concrete:

• The carbon content of a building is a physical fact. Our calculations reflect that reality - not optimism, not projections, not industry averages. Conservative baselines are the default. The gap between specification and reality is to be zero.
• Material sourcing is verifiable. Particularly wood. At this stage, sourcing is the critical integrity checkpoint; everything else flows from whether input materials are what they claim to be.
• Methodology is auditable. The data, assumptions, and calculation methodology behind every ledger entry are transparent. If we are asking others to trust our numbers, we must be willing to show our work.
• Verification is institutionally independent. The entity calculating sequestration and the entity verifying that calculation must be institutionally separate, with no commercial relationship that creates alignment of interest. The Carbon Verification Standard specifies either the verifying body or the selection criteria.
• The registry has a revision history. A living record per building - materials, calculation, verification, issuance date, revision date, revision reason. When a sourcing error is discovered post-issuance, the registry records the correction and the Carbon Verification Standard specifies the remediation process for ledger entries already in circulation.
• No greenwashing. No inflated claims. The arithmetic of substitution is what it is, and the discipline of the platform is to publish it as it is.

Regulatory compliance for certificates (MiCA, VARA, and equivalents) will come as the frameworks mature. We welcome that - it perfects the model. But the carbon is in the building regardless, and we do not delay doing the right thing while waiting for regulatory frameworks to catch up.

Until the Carbon Verification Standard is published in full, the interim position is: configurator data, logistics verification, and satellite monitoring constitute the verification layers; wood sourcing is validated to the extent current supply chain data permits; and any material uncertainty is disclosed to the counterparty at the point of ledger entry.

Distribution of income

The values of any platform are visible in the way it deals with money. FutureCraft draws the line between foundation and competition deliberately. Cities do not pay for basic participation or for use of the configurator; specialist integration, data validation, local implementation, or programme support may be funded separately where required. Architects, engineers, schools, and students do not pay to contribute to the commons; their work is attributed and remains theirs. Citizens and end users do not pay for the configurator or its outputs. The participants who pay are the manufacturers whose products enter resolved configurations, and they pay for direct presence in actual demand resolution, scaling with realised projects rather than with marketing spend. The income that arises is distributed across the system: a majority share sustains the foundation work that makes the rest possible at all - the engagement of the city network, the development and care of the Digital Housing Commons, the resolver stack, the carbon verification methodology, and the platform's continued openness; a defined share flows to the architects and engineers whose patterns the resolvers draw on, attributed to the contributions a given configuration uses; and a defined share flows to the data providers, certifiers, and channel partners through whom verified projects reach the world. The exact percentages are set in the platform's revenue policy and reviewed against the principle that the foundation must remain sustainably open.

Non-discrimination, diversity, and inclusion

FutureCraft and its stakeholders prevent and condemn discrimination of any kind - whether based on ethnicity, gender, origin, nationality, culture, religion, age, disability, or sexual orientation. Proactive D&I policies are adopted at all levels, tracked, and reported regularly.

§ Summary

The HOST://protocol values and their constituent commitments:

§ A living document

This charter is a living document. It will evolve as FutureCraft grows, as new territories and partners join, as AI capabilities advance, as robotic fabrication matures, and as the regulatory and technological landscape shifts. Updates are developed collaboratively with stakeholders and approved by the Board. Specific areas flagged for near-term governance development:

• Detailed AI audit and accountability protocols - in coordination with the regulatory engine team, targeting Q3 2026. Interim position: all configurations entering certification or procurement pathways require documented human review at the point the Perspicuity Resolver releases them.
• Open-source design liability framework - developed by the DHC Foundries in coordination with legal counsel, targeting Q4 2026. Interim position: fork liability transfers to the modifying party as a condition of participation.
• Wood sourcing verification protocols - the critical integrity checkpoint for carbon verification, established ahead of first significant platform-driven construction. Interim position: sourcing is validated to the extent current supply chain data permits, with material uncertainty disclosed at the point of ledger entry.
• Robotics deployment guidelines for city partners - in coordination with the HACC curriculum team. Interim position: no robotic fabrication deployment without documented city partner consultation and approval.
• HOST://protocol community definition process - a collaborative programme to develop precise, binding definitions of key terms in the HOST framework (fair competition, material conflict, structural integrity, carbon verification) through structured engagement with Foundries and city partners. Definitions developed through this process will be incorporated by reference into future versions of the charter. Targeting launch Q1 2027.

The next scheduled comprehensive review is Q4 2026, aligned with the HACC curriculum launch and expanded city onboarding. Questions, suggestions, and challenges to this charter are welcome. That is how it gets better.