Questions prospective participants ask

MIO is a proposed service company, not yet formed. It would run and stand behind the commercial service around MDSL’s products: managing the distributors it appoints, who would be cooperative partners, and supporting implementation and customer success. It would earn by sharing in recurring service revenue. MDSL builds and operates the platform and infrastructure.

Not yet. No investment, ownership, distribution appointment or legal right has been agreed.

Village™ is live by paid subscription; MIO° Conduct Record™, AVA™, Attested Accounts™, Provenance™ and the Email Decision Record™ are available on request. "Live" on these pages means a customer uses it in production. Whether customers will use and pay for them has not been tested; paid deployments are how an early commercial phase would test it.

A sealed record shows that particular bytes existed and were signed by a particular key at a stated time. It does not show the content was true, or that a legal duty was met. The timestamp in use today is non-qualified (Certum, Poland); a qualified EU authority (Aruba PEC, Italy) is contracted, built and tested, and available on request. How a timestamp is treated in any proceeding is a legal question MDSL does not advise on.

We do not publish a market-size estimate, and nothing on this site is a valuation or an offer.

No. It is MDSL’s draft standard for how records are sealed and timestamped, and no external standards body has adopted it. Today’s timestamp arrangement carries a disclosed non-conformance with section 5.3.2 of the draft (it relies on one authority). We make no conformance claim for Attested Accounts.

Nothing is offered yet. Conversations, by invitation, to find out what role would suit the other party: customer, adviser, distributor or introducer. If a commercialisation round were ever held, it would follow diligence and signed terms.

MDSL owns the work today, and the code is proprietary. MDSL’s intention is to move what it has built towards open source, in stages. It is an intention only: nothing has been released, nothing is dated, no licence has been fixed and no stage has been named. What MIO would hold, and on what terms, would be documented and negotiated. It is not settled.

MDSL would want it to pay for commercial proof rather than platform building. No amount, instrument or valuation is published or offered here.

Village is live by paid subscription; MIO° Conduct Record, AVA, Attested Accounts, Provenance and the Email Decision Record are available on request. The Governance API is available on request as a sandbox. A separate signing host, operated by MDSL, keeps the signing key outside the process that writes records. It is in use for every active Village. A 2-of-3 split-key scheme is built and no tenant is on it; it cannot yet be switched on for a tenant. Working systems and records can be checked. The evidence page separates what is operating, what is built and not yet in use, and what is still ahead.

A possible New Zealand time-attestation authority, assessed separately. It is not assumed to be part of MIO. Independence is the point of it, so ownership and commercial dependence have to be structured with care.

Disclosed, recorded and managed. Nobody gains exclusivity by entering a discussion, and a participant who could hold several roles is treated explicitly.

Possibly. The two roles are different and would be kept separate in the terms. The distributor pages set out the role.

Invited parties are given a private room: named people only, sign-in with two-factor authentication, and a record of every document opened or downloaded. See the private room.

No. It is not legal, tax, accounting, securities, investment or financial advice. Binding commitments should be made only after professional advice and signed documents.