Public Evidence Packet
Stripe - Services Agreement
Services Agreement
4961a031-d13e-4e25-b878-22fe5e890e52- Screening date
- 01 Oct 2026, 20:02 UTC
- Jurisdiction
- EU
- Risk screening
- High · 8/10
- Score trace
- Baseline; no earlier public change
This packet records PolicyWatcher evidence and AI-assisted screening for one public change. It is not legal advice, a compliance verdict, a certification, or proof that the external source remains unchanged.
- 01Source evidence
- 02Explainability
- 03Governance Relevance
- 04Report Output
Dataset QA · sanitized public view
Source evidence
- Publication gate
- Published
- Retrieval state
- Recorded retrieval available
- Latest retrieval
- 01 Oct 2026, 20:02 UTC
- Sanitized channel
direct- Data status
- Available
- Public snapshot evidence
- Available
Public snapshot fingerprints
faf2af70f25041e08c72da1c855b41c9c2c6a2927d04c8b79c8c9f0658e53a74Captured 06 Jul 2026, 07:19 UTCb515d0ee1571110505e323960a118fcbf8da3c6d9df076d1740a290ed8319c93Captured 01 Oct 2026, 20:02 UTCSource confidence describes recorded retrieval and publication state. It does not rate the provider policy or certify source authenticity.
Source-anchored screening trace
Explainability
New Stripe terms increase user liability for AI agent actions and impose strict limits on how businesses can use Stripe-derived data, especially for AI and automated decisions.
- Reason 1+2 score contribution
New AI Agent clause shifts full liability to users for AI-driven actions.
- Related KPI
- Automated decisions
- Source side
- new snapshot
Verified exact source passage
“If User uses an AI Agent to access the Stripe Services, User is solely responsible for each action initiated by or through the AI Agent.”
- Reason 2+2 score contribution
Strict 48-hour data incident notification for users increases compliance burden.
- Related KPI
- Breach notification
- Source side
- new snapshot
Verified exact source passage
“User must notify Stripe without undue delay, which will be no later than 48 hours, after becoming aware of the Data Incident.”
- Reason 3+3 score contribution
Extensive restrictions on using Stripe Output Data for AI, profiling, and selling.
- Related KPI
- AI output ownership
- Source side
- Not recorded
Source passage not recordedThis historical reason has no recorded source passage.
Score reasons and deltaScore values are stored AI-assisted screening outputs. Verified anchors confirm only that the quoted passage occurs in the named snapshot; they do not prove the interpretation.
Advisory review map
Governance Relevance
EU AI Act
Official Journal text, 2024
Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, automated decisions, data use and human oversight review?
- AI training opt-out
- Not Available
- Algorithmic transparency
- Opaque
- Automated decisions
- Partial
- AI bias and fairness
- Mentioned
ISO/IEC 42001
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 overview
Which recorded policy statements may inform an AI management-system review of transparency, risk oversight and independent assurance?
- Algorithmic transparency
- Opaque
- AI bias and fairness
- Mentioned
- Independent audit
- Absent
- Regulatory compliance
- Comprehensive
NIST AI RMF
AI RMF 1.0; NIST revision in progress, checked 2026-07-29
Which recorded policy statements may support Govern, Map, Measure or Manage review questions?
- Algorithmic transparency
- Opaque
- Automated decisions
- Partial
- AI bias and fairness
- Mentioned
OECD AI Principles
OECD AI Principles, updated 2024
Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, fairness, accountability and user agency review?
- Algorithmic transparency
- Opaque
- AI bias and fairness
- Mentioned
- Independent audit
- Absent
Mappings identify review relevance between recorded PolicyWatcher KPI fields and framework topics. They are not legal interpretations, conformity assessments, certifications or compliance verdicts.
Exact change-bound files
Report Output
Both files are generated from this exact change ID.
Download exact-change PDF Download exact-change JSON3cdbb29203361e3fe2546eb469ab2dd6ff1c485c14f22f0ad6626449645e29cdQuestions before reuse
- Does the original Services Agreement source still match the recorded public snapshot version 2?
- Do the cited source passages support each displayed reason, KPI value and regional note?
- Which advisory framework topics require specialist legal, risk or governance review for this use case?
- Has a later public change superseded this packet before it is reused in a decision or publication?