The Mirage of Artificial Intelligence Terms of Use Restrictions
Peter Henderson, Mark A. Lemley

TL;DR
This paper critically examines the enforceability of AI model terms of use, arguing that many are legally questionable due to copyright issues and limited legal remedies, and offers policy recommendations.
Contribution
It provides a systematic legal analysis of AI terms of use, highlighting enforceability issues and proposing policy solutions to address misuse and competition concerns.
Findings
AI artifacts are often not copyrightable, questioning licensing validity.
Legal frameworks like DMCA and CFAA offer limited enforcement options.
Many terms of use may unjustifiably restrict research and competition.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) model creators commonly attach restrictive terms of use to both their models and their outputs. These terms typically prohibit activities ranging from creating competing AI models to spreading disinformation. Often taken at face value, these terms are positioned by companies as key enforceable tools for preventing misuse, particularly in policy dialogs. But are these terms truly meaningful? There are myriad examples where these broad terms are regularly and repeatedly violated. Yet except for some account suspensions on platforms, no model creator has actually tried to enforce these terms with monetary penalties or injunctive relief. This is likely for good reason: we think that the legal enforceability of these licenses is questionable. This Article systematically assesses of the enforceability of AI model terms of use and offers three contributions.…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsTechnology, Environment, Urban Planning · Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
