Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Acceptable Use Policies for Foundation Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.09041 v1 pith:TVLLASJI submitted 2024-08-29 cs.CY cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.CL
keywords policiesacceptablefoundationmodelsdevelopersmodelrestrictionsenforce
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

As foundation models have accumulated hundreds of millions of users, developers have begun to take steps to prevent harmful types of uses. One salient intervention that foundation model developers adopt is acceptable use policies: legally binding policies that prohibit users from using a model for specific purposes. This paper identifies acceptable use policies from 30 foundation model developers, analyzes the use restrictions they contain, and argues that acceptable use policies are an important lens for understanding the regulation of foundation models. Taken together, developers' acceptable use policies include 127 distinct use restrictions; the wide variety in the number and type of use restrictions may create fragmentation across the AI supply chain. Developers also employ acceptable use policies to prevent competitors or specific industries from making use of their models. Developers alone decide what constitutes acceptable use, and rarely provide transparency about how they enforce their policies. In practice, acceptable use policies are difficult to enforce, and scrupulous enforcement can act as a barrier to researcher access and limit beneficial uses of foundation models. Nevertheless, acceptable use policies for foundation models are an early example of self-regulation that have a significant impact on the market for foundation models and the overall AI ecosystem.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Bridging the Data Provenance Gap Across Text, Speech and Video

    cs.AI 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A manual audit of nearly 4,000 text, speech, and video datasets finds AI training data increasingly comes from web and social media sources, carries hidden non-commercial restrictions, and remains Western-centric with...

  2. Expressing stigma and inappropriate responses prevents LLMs from safely replacing mental health providers

    cs.CL 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Current large language models show stigma and give clinically inappropriate responses to common mental health symptoms, so they should not be deployed as replacement therapists.

Pith tools