Skip to main content
For families who want their stories to last. learn about the founding circle.

Knowledge partners

The questions we don't answer alone.

What should software remember about the dead, and who owns a memory in law? Confinity works these questions through with two Oxford societies, one reading our AI posture and one reading our legal one.

Named scope. Named people. Published outputs. Never a logo strip.

Read the Trust Centre
Partner pilot

Two collaborations

What each partnership is.

Memory & machine ethics

Oxford University AI Society

A standing review of how Confinity's software behaves around the dead and the grieving: resurfacing cadence, per-person tone controls, the consent model for anniversary prompts, and the no-impersonation default in writing assist. The society's members read the actual product behaviour rather than a summary we prepared, and their findings are published whether or not they flatter us.What it produces: A dated posture review, republished in full in our essays; an annual student essay prize on AI and remembrance, judged jointly.

Digital legacy & inheritance

Oxford Law Society

Plain-language guidance on where a family memory archive sits in wills and probate: what an executor needs, how ownership transfer should read, and what a 'digital heirloom' means in law today. The working group reviews our Legacy Kit and the ownership-transfer terms partners rely on. Those are the exact words a family will one day depend on.What it produces: A downloadable guidance note for families and solicitors; a reviewed-by line on the Legacy Kit; annotations on our plain-English terms.

Both are independent student societies. Nothing on this page implies endorsement by the University of Oxford, and neither society is paid for favourable findings.

How this works

Rigour we don't grade ourselves on.

Named scope, named term

Each collaboration has a written scope and a review cadence. When it lapses, it comes off this page. A partnership that quietly expired is not a partnership.

People with names

The work is done by people with names and titles, and they appear here with both once each society confirms its convenors for the year. Until then, the space stays empty rather than vague.

Outputs are public

Everything the partnerships produce is dated and published: reviews, guidance notes, essays. Nothing is backdated, and nothing appears on this page before it exists.

Independence is the point

Partners review what we actually shipped and publish what they actually found. A collaboration that can only say kind things would tell you nothing.

Published outputs

The ledger starts empty.

Every review, guidance note, and essay the partnerships produce will be listed here with the date it was published, and nothing will be listed before it exists. The same rule as our Trust Centre: if we can't show it yet, we say so here before we say anything else anywhere.

First entries: the AI posture review and the digital-legacy guidance note, both in progress for the 2026–27 academic year.