Add HPF to your workflow

HPF standardises a producer-declared record of finished-work provenance: the classification, the released version covered, a factual summary of the relevant AI use, the declaring party and the version of the standard applied. Without such a record, each organisation decides for itself how AI use should be described, and a producer may describe the same production differently each time it is submitted, delivered or licensed.

An organisation can accept the record within its existing workflow. It keeps control of what productions are eligible, when approval must be sought, what additional information is required, how rights, consent and contractual requirements are assessed, how it communicates with audiences, and what action to take on receiving the information.

The aim is a reusable core record that sits beneath different institutional policies, not a universal institutional questionnaire, which would grow long without becoming universal.

A lightweight approach is to:

1. Request an HPF declaration for the released version being submitted or delivered.
2. Check that it is complete and covers the released version received. The Declaration receipt checklist provides a one-page completeness check. It does not assess whether the information is accurate.
3. Keep it with the corresponding record, such as the application, submission, acquisition or delivery record.
4. Seek clarification if something is unclear, or ask for the declaration for the released version supplied if the one you hold covers a different version.

The declaration records the classification assigned by the producer. HPF does not require the receiving organisation to reproduce that classification exercise. The organisation may conduct any separate review required by its own policy.

The declaration can be accepted as a document alongside your existing materials. Recording any of its information in your own system is optional.

Confirm that it:

• identifies the production and the version, cut, episode or edition covered;
• states one HPF classification;
• names the version of the HPF standard applied;
• where the classification is Assistive AI or Generative AI, describes what the AI did and what output reached the released version;
• identifies the declaring party; and
• includes the declarant’s assertion that they are authorised to make the declaration, together with their name, role, signature and date.

This is a completeness check, not an audit. Check that the information and the assertion of authority are present. Any assessment of their accuracy is a matter for your organisation’s own policy, contracts or legal obligations, rather than part of the HPF receipt check.

If something is missing or unclear, ask the declaring party to complete or correct the declaration rather than filling gaps or changing the declared classification yourself.

The HPF AI Disclosure Form records this information. Another document containing the same information may also be used.

Record that no HPF classification has been provided, then apply your own policy. A missing declaration establishes neither that AI was used nor that it was not used.

An organisation may describe the production in its own terms under its own policy, for example as undisclosed. Any such description belongs to the organisation and is not an HPF classification.

An HPF declaration classifies a defined version of a finished production. Before such a version exists, an organisation may ask for the classification the producer currently expects. Once a defined version exists, it can request a declaration for that version. When a different version is later supplied, it should check whether the declaration covers it.

A declaration can accompany a production through several workflows where recipients choose to accept it. Each recipient can use it as the common provenance record and request any additional information its own policy requires.

Suggested request

Replace submitted with delivered, being acquired or licensed or supplied as appropriate.

An expected classification is provisional planning information. It is not an HPF declaration and does not classify a production that does not yet exist.

Suggested request

Record the expected classification separately from the final declaration. A difference between the two does not by itself establish that any requirement has been breached. Consider the change under your own funding, commissioning or approval policy.

An HPF declaration covers one released version and may travel with every delivery of that version. A different codec, container, delivery master or territory delivery of the same picture and sound is the same released version. A later released version, such as a director’s cut, a restored edition that changes the picture or sound, or a substantive localisation, has its own declaration, even where the facts are unchanged. Some localisation and episodic cases remain under consultation: see consultation question 4. A declaration for a later version does not change the record for an earlier one, and HPF does not require producers to notify recipients of an earlier version. A correction is different: if an error is found, the declaring party issues a corrected declaration that names the one it replaces. Released versions in the filmmaker guide lists the usual cases.

If you receive a version that the declaration does not identify, ask the declaring party whether the declaration still covers it or request a declaration for the version supplied, rather than making that determination on the producer’s behalf. Retain enough version information to distinguish between declarations.

If you store HPF information in a database or submission system, use the fields and permitted values defined in the current JSON schema, and keep the complete declaration as the source record. A blank or missing value is never converted to No AI Used.

Where appropriate, the declaration or its recorded information can accompany the production to another recipient, which can reduce repeated requests while each organisation applies its own policy. The integration guide covers the current fields and the optional carriage mechanisms. Both documents are aligned with version 0.9.3 of the standard and remain under consultation.

• Declaration receipt checklist
• The HPF Taxonomy
• The HPF AI Disclosure Form
• The fragmented state of AI disclosure in film
• When an organisation asks about AI
• Integration guide