More than 30 OpenAI and Google DeepMind employees filed a statement Monday supporting Anthropic’s lawsuit against the U.

Defense Department after the federal agency labeled the AI firm a supply-chain risk, according to court filings.

“The government’s designation of Anthropic as a supply chain risk was an improper and arbitrary use of power that has serious ramifications for our industry,” reads the brief, whose signatories include Google DeepMind chief scientist Jeff Dean.

Late last week, the Pentagon labeled Anthropic a supply-chain risk — usually reserved for foreign adversaries — after the AI firm refused to allow the Department of Defense (DOD) to use its technology for mass surveillance of Americans or autonomously firing weapons.

The DOD had argued that it should be able to use AI for any “lawful” purpose and not be constrained by a private contractor.

The amicus brief in support of Anthropic showed up on the docket a few hours after the Claude maker filed two lawsuits against the DOD and other federal agencies. Wired was first to report the news.

In the court filing, the Google and OpenAI employees make the point that if the Pentagon was “no longer satisfied with the agreed-upon terms of its contract with Anthropic,” the agency could have “simply canceled the contract and purchased the services of another leading AI company.

” The DOD did, in fact, sign a deal with OpenAI within moments of designating Anthropic a supply-chain risk — a move many of the ChatGPT maker’s employees protested.

“If allowed to proceed, this effort to punish one of the leading U. AI companies will undoubtedly have consequences for the United States’ industrial and scientific competitiveness in the field of artificial intelligence and beyond,” the brief reads.

“And it will chill open deliberation in our field about the risks and benefits of today’s AI systems.

” The filing also affirms that Anthropic’s stated red lines are legitimate concerns warranting strong guardrails.

Without public law to govern AI use, it argues, the contractual and technical restrictions developers impose on their systems are a critical safeguard against catastrophic misuse

Highlighted sentences link to their corresponding claims. Click any highlighted sentence to jump to its detailed analysis.
Highlight Colors Indicate Claim Quality:
✓ Healthy Claim - No fallacies or contradictions detected
⚠️ Minor Issues - Has contradictions or minor fallacies
🚨 Serious Issues - Multiple contradictions or severe fallacies
Quality Criteria: Claims are evaluated for logical fallacies and contradictions with other news sources. Green highlights indicate healthy claims suitable for reference.
Source