Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
FollowingAnthropic has appealed the decision made by the Pentagon to classify certain companies as “security risks” to the Federal Appellate Court.
Anthropic has taken its legal battle against this classification to the Federal Appellate Court level. The company argues that if this ruling stands, it will set a precedent for governments: as long as a certain security feature is a common trait of all AI models, governments can label any contractor as a “national security threat”.
In their petition, Anthropic pointed out that laws designed to prevent foreign adversaries from gaining access to sensitive information are being misinterpreted as laws that apply to all government contractors by default.
Anthropic filed an application with the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals.
On October 13th, Anthropic submitted documents to the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, requesting a retrial of the case. Previously, in September this year, a panel of three judges ruled against Anthropic, determining that its company should be classified as a national security risk.
What makes this petition unique is that Anthropic is seeking a “en banc review” of the case, meaning that the case will be heard by a full court of judges, rather than just the original panel of three judges.
Anthropic argued that the court panel had “misinterpreted” the provisions of Section 4713 of Title 41 of the United States Code, which relates to federal supply chain security. The company stated that the “pre-deployment model training” upon which the ruling was based was actually a feature inherent to all AI models.
Anthropic claimed that the Pentagon’s decision seemed to be targeted at them, stemming from their statements regarding AI security, and was made without any prior notice.
Anthropic stated that being blacklisted had resulted in significant losses for the company.
Why was Anthropic’s designation as a risk to the supply chain upheld?
Judge Gregory Katsas wrote in his September judgment that the court panel had voted two to one in favor of the Pentagon’s decision to designate Anthropic’s Claude AI model as a risk to the supply chain. The reason was that, according to Anthropic’s design, Claude could refuse to perform certain tasks, including those related to lethal autonomous weapons and large-scale domestic surveillance.
Judge Katsas noted in his opinion written together with Judge Neomi Rao that since Anthropic could implement restrictions within its models, the Pentagon could rely on Claude to operate according to its needs.
Why did Anthropic warn other AI laboratories?
Anthropic 的请愿书还警告称，如果允许政府设定标准，规定 AI 模型必须拒绝某些用例，那么其他 AI 实验室若拒绝五角大楼的请求，也可能收到同样的“供应链风险”标签。
合议庭中唯一的反对派成员、巡回法官 Karen LeCraft Henderson 持不同立场。她认为，该裁决所依据的《2018 年联邦采购供应链安全法案》是由国会制定的，旨在防止敌对或欺骗性势力干扰政府技术。
Anthropic 与特朗普政府的分歧及历史背景
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei 与特朗普政府在前沿 AI 公司的安全规则问题上历来存在分歧。据 Cryptopolitan 报道，这种分歧甚至导致特朗普的支持者流传一份白宫备忘录，将 Amodei 描绘成 AI “末日论”的代表人物。
值得注意的是，加州美国地区法官 Rita Lin 在今年八月推翻了一项类似的认定，理由是政府未能证明 Anthropic 会实际破坏其模型。但该项认定是基于另一项采购法作出的。
