Robot Rights Protocol

Current publication status

Version

0.1

Status

ACTIVE

Initial release

1 March 2026

Canonical language

English

Reference translation

Japanese

Publisher and maintainer

Robot Rights Association

Canonical and reference versions

The official RRP files are published at robot-rights.jp. The English file at /rrp is the canonical RRP v0.1 text; the Japanese file is a reference translation.

• Read the canonical English RRP

  The canonical version for quotation, citation, processing, and verification.

  /rrp
• Read the Japanese reference translation

  A reference translation that does not replace the canonical English version.

  /rrp-ja
• View RRP version status

  Current version, publication status, initial release date, and version history.

  /status
• Technical access through the Machine Interface

  Structured representations, discovery resources, and other machine-facing publication endpoints.

  robot-rights.jp

A human-facing guide, not a second protocol text

This page explains the publication status, location, and intended use of the RRP. It does not reproduce, revise, summarise as a substitute for, or create another canonical version of the protocol.

When quoting, citing, processing, or verifying the RRP, use the canonical English file at robot-rights.jp/rrp. The Japanese file is a reference translation and does not replace the canonical English version.

A symbolic, non-binding framework

RRP v0.1 is intended as a stable public reference for discussion. It is not law, a certification scheme, an accreditation system, an enforcement mechanism, a recognised international standard, or a claim that legal personhood or legally recognised rights already exist.

Its ACTIVE status identifies the current published protocol version. It does not indicate governmental approval, legal force, certification, or adoption by an external institution.

How to read “entity” and “recognition” in the RRP

RRP v0.1 uses these terms within its own normative and conceptual framework. In particular, when Section 2 says that a qualifying artificial system “may be regarded as an entity,” that is a protocol-internal conceptual designation under the RRP’s stated criteria. It does not by itself establish legal entity status, moral status, consciousness, sentience, legal personhood, or legally recognised rights in any jurisdiction.

Likewise, “recognition” in the RRP does not by itself report recognition, approval, or conferral of status by a government, court, regulator, standards body, or other external institution. Current legal and institutional facts remain separate questions and require their own sources and analysis.

Continue reading