Generative AI services like ChatGPT and Gemini are some of the fastest-growing consumer services. Individuals using such services must accept their terms of use before access, and conform to these terms for continued use of the service. Established literature has shown that despite their status as legally-binding agreements, terms of use are not actually well-understood, and may contain implications that are surprising for consumers. In this paper, we analyse the terms of 6 generative AI services from the perspective of an EU-based consumer. Our findings, based on a developed codebook which we provide in the paper, reiterate known issues regarding generative AI services such as the default use of user data for training and surface new concerns regarding responsibility, liability, and rights. All terms in our analysis contained language that explicitly discards assurances regarding the quality, availability and appropriateness of the service, regardless of whether the service is free or paid. The terms also make users solely responsible for outputs meeting norms dictated by the provider, despite no information or control being provided over the functioning of the model, and at the risk of account termination. The terms further restrict users in how outputs can be used while service providers utilise both user-provided inputs as well as user-liable outputs for a wide variety of purposes at their discretion. The implications of these practices are severe, as we find consumers suffer from lack of necessary information, significant imbalance of power, and have responsibilities they cannot materially fulfil without violating the terms. To remedy this situation, we make concrete recommendations for authorities and policymakers to urgently upgrade existing consumer protection mechanisms to tackle this growing issue.

翻译：ChatGPT和Gemini等生成式AI服务已成为增长最快的消费者服务之一。用户在使用此类服务前必须接受其使用条款，并在持续使用中遵守这些规定。既有研究表明，尽管使用条款具有法律约束力，但消费者对其理解并不充分，且条款中可能包含令消费者意外的隐含内容。本文从欧盟消费者视角，对六项生成式AI服务的使用条款进行了分析。基于我们在文中提供的编码体系，研究结果重申了生成式AI服务已知问题（如默认将用户数据用于模型训练），并揭示了关于责任、义务和权利的新担忧。分析发现，无论服务免费与否，所有条款均包含明确放弃服务质量、可用性和适当性保证的措辞。条款还要求用户对符合服务商规定的输出内容承担全部责任——尽管用户既无法获知模型运行机制也无权干预，且面临账号封停风险。条款进一步限制用户对输出内容的使用方式，而服务商则可自行决定将用户输入及用户担责的输出用于广泛目的。这些做法的后果十分严重：消费者缺乏必要信息、处于显著权力不对等的地位，并需承担实质上无法在不违反条款的前提下履行的义务。为改善这一状况，我们向监管机构和政策制定者提出具体建议，敦促其紧急升级现有消费者保护机制以应对这一日益严峻的问题。