Public Evidence Packet
Anthropic - Commercial Terms
Commercial Terms
57d20bfa-ebeb-487e-993f-65bf9da6c85d- Screening date
- 22 Oct 2026, 11:40 UTC
- Jurisdiction
- Global
- Risk screening
- Low · 2/10
- 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
- 22 Oct 2026, 11:40 UTC
- Sanitized channel
direct- Data status
- Available
- Public snapshot evidence
- Available
Public snapshot fingerprints
7404947bbb17f72a04b2d375b0cdc348184ba07990bf188934a4d95bbef29e26Captured 02 Oct 2026, 04:55 UTC5491fe277b5d413f04f4bd8d45ebb069edeb28c8ab078aac4bf7c079e8ca77ceCaptured 22 Oct 2026, 11:40 UTCSource confidence describes recorded retrieval and publication state. It does not rate the provider policy or certify source authenticity.
Source-anchored screening trace
Explainability
Anthropic updated its commercial terms with formatting headers, keeping data ownership and anti-training protections unchanged.
- Reason 10 score contribution
Formatting updates applied with no reduction in core data protections.
- Related KPI
- Regulatory compliance
- Source side
- new snapshot
Verified exact source passage
“### A. Services”
- Reason 2-1 score contribution
Strict prohibition on using customer service data for model training.
- Related KPI
- AI training opt-out
- Source side
- new snapshot
Verified exact source passage
“Anthropic may not train models on Customer Content from Services.”
- Reason 3+1 score contribution
Liability is capped at fees paid over the previous 12 months.
- Related KPI
- Regulatory compliance
- Source side
- new snapshot
Verified exact source passage
“is limited to Fees paid by Customer for the Services in the previous 12 months.”
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
- Available
- Algorithmic transparency
- Opaque
- Automated decisions
- Transparent
- 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
- Mentioned
- 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
- Transparent
- AI bias and fairness
- Mentioned
- Content moderation
- Transparent
OECD AI Principles
OECD AI Principles, updated 2024
Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, fairness, accountability and user agency review?
- Consent mechanism
- Explicit Opt-In
- Algorithmic transparency
- Opaque
- AI bias and fairness
- Mentioned
- Independent audit
- Mentioned
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 JSON6412e0a0fbb77876f3f5590a032c582c77db433f3c4875826aa1aecf2ecc011cQuestions before reuse
- Does the original Commercial Terms 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?