Which entries describe more than one layer
Two entries describe two marking layers on the same file. One pairs a manifest with a visible notice, the other pairs it with an invisible signal, and in both cases the two layers fail under different handling. As of 2026-09-12.
| Point | Where it sits | What the record holds |
|---|---|---|
| A manifest plus a visible notice | One entry | Metadata on all assets, and a moving mark on downloads |
| A manifest plus an embedded signal | One entry | Credentials from a version, and a signal on all videos |
| A single layer, or none | Fourteen entries | One mechanism at most, and usually only a priced notice |
Inclusion rule. Entries whose pages describe more than one mechanism applied to the same output. A capability offered as an option counts only where the page says it is applied. Order. Two-layer entries first, then the rest of the record.
1Two layers is a design answer to a real failure mode
A manifest carries structure and is dropped by any container rebuild. A signal inside the content carries almost nothing and survives exactly that. Neither is the durable mechanism; they are durable against different handling.
Applying both means a file that has been through a stripping pipeline still says something, and a file that arrives intact says a great deal. Nothing else in this record covers both cases.
2The two pairings answer different readers
One entry's second layer is a notice a viewer can see, which is the only arrangement in this record where the same page addresses both the provider duty and something a person will notice.
The other's second layer is an invisible signal, which addresses the same provider duty twice over and leaves a viewer with nothing. Both are coherent, and they are aimed at different problems.
3Fourteen entries describe one layer at most
Most describe a visible mark priced into a plan and nothing else. A few describe a signal and say nothing visible. That distribution is the shape of the record and it is worth stating without dressing it up.
A reader comparing tools should take the two-layer entries as the exception rather than as a standard the others fall short of. Nothing in the article asks for two layers, and no page here claims to be meeting a standard at all.
- Amazon Nova Reel (aws.amazon.com)An invisible watermark is applied to all videos it generates, and a detection solution can check whether one is presenta video generation model
- OpenAI SoraA visible moving watermark on videos downloaded from sora.com or the Sora appthe layer tied to the download route
- Amazon Nova ReelVersion 1.1 adds Content Credentials based on the C2PA specification, carrying the model and the platform usedthe second provenance layer
- OpenAI Sora (openai.com)C2PA metadata on all assets, listed as providing verifiable origin through an industry standardfirst item under provenance safety tooling
4Sources
Article wording from AI Act Explorer, Article 50; vendor statements from the pages listed on each generator entry. Both read 2026-09-12. Related: Does anyone say why, A flag set in code, Scope you can use.