PolicyWatcherPublic evidence laboratory

Public Evidence Packet

OpenAI - Terms of Use

Terms of Use

4e8ed932-090d-4a02-8304-22144bfdbff5
Screening date
28 Jul 2026, 22:39 UTC
Jurisdiction
Global
Risk screening
Medium · 6/10
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.

  1. 01Source evidence
  2. 02Explainability
  3. 03Governance Relevance
  4. 04Report Output
01

Dataset QA · sanitized public view

Source evidence

Publication gate
Published
Retrieval state
Recorded retrieval available
Latest retrieval
04 Nov 2026, 18:38 UTC
Sanitized channel
direct
Data status
Available
Public snapshot evidence
Available

Public snapshot fingerprints

Previous · version 1599267d5fa112f01fc9d48479ad4139cd2c5f1e10e1da00ddf2b5f57be256aabCaptured 06 Jul 2026, 07:19 UTC
Current · version 2e1b6c7256017665913760b6f42591f7b2c3ac632c46ff6f001a7bb0d462e61b8Captured 28 Jul 2026, 22:39 UTC

Source confidence describes recorded retrieval and publication state. It does not rate the provider policy or certify source authenticity.

02

Source-anchored screening trace

Explainability

You own your AI output and can opt-out of training, but corporate email use risks employer access and you must verify AI accuracy.

  1. Reason 1+2 score contribution

    Corporate email use allows employer control over personal accounts.

    Related KPI
    No related KPI recorded
    Source side
    Not recorded
    Source passage not recorded

    This historical reason has no recorded source passage.

  2. Reason 2+1 score contribution

    Broad 'worldwide' content use implies extensive data transfers.

    Related KPI
    No related KPI recorded
    Source side
    Not recorded
    Source passage not recorded

    This historical reason has no recorded source passage.

  3. Reason 3+1 score contribution

    Users must verify AI output accuracy; OpenAI disclaims responsibility.

    Related KPI
    No related KPI recorded
    Source side
    Not recorded
    Source passage not recorded

    This 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.

03

Advisory review map

Governance Relevance

EU AI Act

Official Journal text, 2024

Mapped evidence

Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, automated decisions, data use and human oversight review?

AI training opt-out
Opt-Out
Algorithmic transparency
Opaque
Automated decisions
Opaque
AI bias and fairness
Absent
Framework source

ISO/IEC 42001

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 overview

Mapped evidence

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
Absent
Independent audit
Absent
Regulatory compliance
Comprehensive
Framework source

NIST AI RMF

AI RMF 1.0; NIST revision in progress, checked 2026-07-29

Mapped evidence

Which recorded policy statements may support Govern, Map, Measure or Manage review questions?

Algorithmic transparency
Opaque
Automated decisions
Opaque
AI bias and fairness
Absent
Framework source

OECD AI Principles

OECD AI Principles, updated 2024

Mapped evidence

Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, fairness, accountability and user agency review?

Consent mechanism
Implicit
Algorithmic transparency
Opaque
AI bias and fairness
Absent
Independent audit
Absent
Framework source

Mappings identify review relevance between recorded PolicyWatcher KPI fields and framework topics. They are not legal interpretations, conformity assessments, certifications or compliance verdicts.

04

Exact change-bound files

Report Output

Both files are generated from this exact change ID.

Download exact-change PDF Download exact-change JSON
Packet content digest · SHA-2568c2caa493e6d56d45c4eb6a2a04e13c96bd14f429e01250711d1259b954b813a

Questions before reuse

  1. Does the original Terms of Use source still match the recorded public snapshot version 2?
  2. Do the cited source passages support each displayed reason, KPI value and regional note?
  3. Which advisory framework topics require specialist legal, risk or governance review for this use case?
  4. Has a later public change superseded this packet before it is reused in a decision or publication?