authorship is relational under a license; the extensional statement is superseded

Maintainer decision (the same follow-up), closing the round's second outstanding action. Authorship at a step is: there is a grounding selection from the pre-state prefix, and the verdict lies in the set of verdicts those grounds license, with License : grounds → Set 𝒱 a parameter (GateIsLegitimacy.LicensedAt). The extensional form (the verdict a function of the grounds; V = F(R)) is the case of singleton licenses: it implies the relational form and the two are equivalent under singleton licenses (grounded_implies_licensed, licensed_singleton_implies_grounded, grounded_iff_licensed_singleton). This supersedes the extensional statement of authorship in the time-indexing entry above and the frame-level V = F(R) gloss, which stand as the singleton case. Tie-breaking is transparency's: when several verdicts are licensed, a non-principal party's influence on which she takes must enter through the declared inputs, else the step fails transparency (tiebreak_transparency). payload_of_view weakens to "both verdicts lie in the licensed set of the same grounds". For the consultation model the license is data: her committed program's own verdict, both answers under free choice, and the followed recommendation when trust in the agent is among the grounds (licensed); following with no trust among the grounds fails authorship. No row of the table changes classification; rows 18 and 19 exhibit the permissive case and its tie-break. Rejected alternatives: keeping the extensional form (it fails a principal who, given the same reasons, legitimately chooses between two permissible options); treating tie-breaking as an authorship condition.