一起新的集体诉讼在加州联邦法院起诉 4 家前沿 AI 实验室,指称协调限制 AI 开发违反《谢尔曼法》第一条。诉状将所谓协议追溯到 9 月 12 日 Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 呼吁全行业协调限制 AI 发展,当天 3 家竞争对手高管公开支持部分主张;原告代表付费用户寻求禁令和三倍赔偿,并强调不质疑单边安全测试、外部评估或政府监管。
Some key language from the class action lawsuit that was filed against the 4 AI Frontier Labs
- “The antitrust laws do not permit competitors to decide among themselves that competition is too dangerous. Whether frontier AI should develop more slowly is a question for each company acting alone, or for Congress and the agencies.”
- “A firm that slows alone loses customers, revenue, and technological leadership to rivals that keep going. Amodei’s proposal solved that problem the way cartels always have: by agreeing to slow together, so that no participant bears the competitive cost of restraint.”
- “An agreement that slows improvement lowers the quality of what subscribers receive for the price they pay. That is an overcharge, and it is an injury of the kind the antitrust laws were enacted to prevent.”
A new class action lawsuit just filed, suing 4 AI frontier labs over the alleged "AI slowdown" pact. Filed in California federal court, it says coordinated limits on AI development violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The complaint traces the alleged agreement to September 12, when Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei urged industrywide coordination to limit unchecked AI progress. And then executives at 3 rival frontier companies publicly supported parts of that proposal the same day, which plaintiffs characterize as acceptance of a common restraint. Their argument treats slower capability growth as reduced output because paid subscribers expect continuing improvements in reasoning, coding, agents, context windows and other features. The plaintiffs say a company slowing independently risks losing customers, revenue, talent and technological leadership, while collective restraint could remove that competitive penalty. They seek to represent a nationwide class of people paying for 4 major AI assistants and are requesting an injunction plus treble damages. The filing also stresses that plaintiffs are not challenging unilateral safety testing, outside evaluations, environmental safeguards or government regulation. Ofcourse, the lawsuit remains an allegation, and public statements supporting similar safety goals do not by themselves establish that competitors formed an unlawful agreement.在 X 查看被引用的帖子
来源:Rohan Paul · x.com
事件后续 · 5
查看事件全部- 同事件Anthropic 与 OpenAI 提议协调放缓前沿 AI 开发,Cohere CEO 等批评者质疑其真实动机The Decoder:AI News · 2026-09-15
- 同事件科技巨头放缓 AI 开发的口头协议是安全共识还是卡特尔The Verge:AI · 2026-09-15
- 同事件Sam Altman 表示同意 Dario Amodei 的放缓前沿主张,OpenAI 将同样开放独立评估者访问Sam Altman · 2026-09-13
- 同事件Tomer Tunguz 解析 Amodei 放缓前沿提议背后的五派立场与算力监管难题Tomasz Tunguz 博客 · 2026-09-15
- 同事件Dario Amodei 发文呼吁为前沿 AI 降速并提出三点计划Dario Amodei · 2026-09-12