This is an objective standard as a matter of contract interpretation. If it was the government’s right to determine the lawfulness of a usage, it would say so. Perhaps it does elsewhere in the agreement, but that’s not the case here.
Ok, honest question: Can you point to language in the contract that definitively limits the use of OAI tools that’s beyond what current laws or regulations require?
Sorry, I think we may be talking past each other. The language you quoted is an objective standard. If, for example, a court ruled that the government had violated the Constitution using the tool, that language would be breached. I don’t think anything I’ve seen (though we haven’t seen the whole agreement!) allows the government to use the product in violation of the law. Anthropic wanted to go further by further limiting the uses in specific cases.
Ok I think we are largely in agreement, though perhaps missing the main point: Anthropic wanted restrictions above and beyond “all legal uses”. This was widely reported in the last few days.
OpenAI is passing off their deal as providing additional safeguards beyond “all legal uses” but the language they’ve released doesn’t seem to support that narrative. I’m incensed, and am attempting to point out the hypocrisy in the hopes that OAI gets some blowback for this cynical stunt.
This is an objective standard as a matter of contract interpretation. If it was the government’s right to determine the lawfulness of a usage, it would say so. Perhaps it does elsewhere in the agreement, but that’s not the case here.