DSIT ↔ Anthropic
Directly documented interface
Formal cooperation
Named parties enter a defined memorandum or research agreement; implementation separately documented.
undirected. undirected
Displayed claim → analysis (if present) → coded attributes → interface / instrument → atomic evidence → source version
Instrument and timeline
- Instrument
- Formal cooperation
- Bindingness
- Explicitly voluntary and non-legally binding
- Announced
- 2025-02-14
- Observed by
- 2025-02-13 · day
- Effective period
- Unknown → Unknown
- Event
- Signed 13 February; published 14 February 2025
- Status at cutoff
- unresolved/unknown
- Last confirmation
- 2026-01-27
Government signature block dates signature 13 February; publication is 14 February. These are distinct events.
- Voluntary memorandum; does not establish delivery of every contemplated activity.
Status investigation
Checked 2026-09-12; assessed as of 2026-09-12. Last confirmation does not establish uninterrupted continuity.
- amendments
- unknown
- expiry
- unknown
- termination
- investigated within listed sources
- restrictions
- investigated within listed sources
- succession
- see succession.json
- conflicts
- No material conflict recorded; no absence of conflict inferred.
Search queries
- "dsit" "anthropic" cooperation 2026 amendment termination expiry status before:2026-09-13
Analytical assessment
No reviewed analytical conclusion is attached. This does not establish independence or absence of an institutional constraint.
Coded attributes
technical-control: shared-constrained
Practical ability to alter the model, its availability, or safeguards in the specified deployment. Contract clauses alone are insufficient.
Actor × exact model/deployment × period. Anthropic provision and replacement of Claude models for DoW, contrasted with deployed operational control; 2025–August 2026; assessed 2026-08-27.
Anthropic provides model artifacts and responds to feedback; DoW and cloud providers independently gate operational deployment. Existing deployed models are outside Anthropic technical alteration or shutdown. Consequential functions are divided across institutions, satisfying shared/constrained control without attributing a real-time veto.
Supporting evidence: court-model-provision court-update-gate . Counterevidence: contractual-control court-static-deployment
- Coding applies only to stated context and date, not a permanent institutional rank.
Published rubric anchors
- little-control
- No demonstrated practical control over the specified consequential operation, with affirmative contrary evidence.
- shared-constrained
- Consequential controls divided among actor, host, customer or enforceable technical constraints.
- substantial
- Actor demonstrably retains major development, update or access controls in this environment.
- dominant-lifecycle
- Actor demonstrably controls development, deployment, updates and access across the specified lifecycle without a consequential independent controller.
Unresolved when necessary evidence is missing or adjacent anchors cannot be distinguished. No numeric conversion. Absence requires affirmative remit or operational evidence, not missing sources.
Atomic evidence and exact sources
Anthropic connects the GOV.UK assistant project to its February 2025 memorandum.
- Source
- GOV.UK assistant development partnership · Anthropic
- Version
- 2026-01-27; retrieved 2026-09-12
- Exact locator
- Opening and partnership description
- Limit
- No effectiveness or continuing status inferred.
Retrieved bytes SHA-256: 4323ab90776d87aca6bde10789fcf738265ef8595e903e8508aa32b47987dc92
Anthropic could not technologically enforce contractual usage restrictions and lacked direct visibility into DoW use.
- Source
- Anthropic v DoW: summary judgment, document 250 · US District Court, Northern District of California
- Version
- 2026-08-27; retrieved 2026-09-12
- Exact locator
- Printed page 6
- Limit
- Specific deployed environment; does not imply no control over future development, contracts or provision.
DSIT and anthropic record shared cooperation intent in a memorandum.
- Source
- UK–anthropic cooperation memorandum · DSIT
- Version
- 2025-02-14; retrieved 2026-09-12
- Exact locator
- Sections I–III and Signatories (13 February 2025)
- Limit
- Voluntary memorandum; does not establish delivery of every contemplated activity.
Retrieved bytes SHA-256: 1e270b8c80889076dc6451ba344f77746832ec02cbc049db7db30ddb98975487
The court describes deployed DoW Claude models as static and beyond Anthropic technological access, alteration or shutdown.
- Source
- Anthropic v DoW: summary judgment, document 250 · US District Court, Northern District of California
- Version
- 2026-08-27; retrieved 2026-09-12
- Exact locator
- Printed page 17, Section II.F, first paragraph
- Limit
- Applies to deployed models described in this litigation, not future model provision or hosted consumer services.
The court records that replacement Claude models undergo third-party cloud-provider and DoW security testing and evaluation before operational approval.
- Source
- Anthropic v DoW: summary judgment, document 250 · US District Court, Northern District of California
- Version
- 2026-08-27; retrieved 2026-09-12
- Exact locator
- Printed page 17, Section II.F, first paragraph
- Limit
- Identifies a deployment approval gate, not complete interpretability, universal evaluation sufficiency or provider substitutability.
The court records Anthropic providing models to DoW or a primary defense contractor and responding to DoW evaluation feedback and requests.
- Source
- Anthropic v DoW: summary judgment, document 250 · US District Court, Northern District of California
- Version
- 2026-08-27; retrieved 2026-09-12
- Exact locator
- Printed page 17, Section II.F, first paragraph
- Limit
- Provision is distinct from control over deployed inference; future supply terms and update alternatives are unspecified.
Supporting and conflicting evidence
Interface support: e-uk-anthropic-cooperation, uk-anthropic-followup. Counterevidence: None recorded; this does not mean none exists.
Substantive review
evidence/uk-anthropic-followup: approved · agent reviewer codex-research-checker · 2026-09-12
Anthropic January27 announcement explicitly links the GOV.UK assistant project to its February2025 memorandum; project attribution is supported. Checked locator: Opening and partnership description. Source version: 2026-01-27.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
evidence/contractual-control: approved · agent reviewer codex-research-checker · 2026-09-12
Judgment page6 distinguishes contractual conditions from technical enforcement and use visibility in the specified environment; later provision and lifecycle control are expressly not excluded. Checked locator: Printed page 6. Source version: 2026-08-27.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
instruments/i-uk-anthropic-cooperation: approved · agent reviewer codex-research-checker · 2026-09-12
Full memorandum explicitly states voluntary/non-legally-binding terms; signed versus announcement dates are handled in relationship evidence.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
evidence/e-uk-anthropic-cooperation: approved · agent reviewer codex-primary · 2026-09-12
Independently inspected the primary source at the recorded locator. Narrow proposition, attribution, date/version and stated limit supported; conflicting access/technical/status accounts remain separate.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
evidence/court-static-deployment: approved · agent reviewer codex-primary · 2026-09-12
Independently inspected the primary source at the recorded locator. Narrow proposition, attribution, date/version and stated limit supported; conflicting access/technical/status accounts remain separate.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
evidence/court-update-gate: approved · agent reviewer codex-primary · 2026-09-12
Independently inspected the primary source at the recorded locator. Narrow proposition, attribution, date/version and stated limit supported; conflicting access/technical/status accounts remain separate.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
evidence/court-model-provision: approved · agent reviewer codex-primary · 2026-09-12
Independently inspected the primary source at the recorded locator. Narrow proposition, attribution, date/version and stated limit supported; conflicting access/technical/status accounts remain separate.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
relationships/uk-anthropic-cooperation: approved · agent reviewer codex-primary · 2026-09-12
Checked endpoint identity and narrower predicate against source; announcement differs from actual testing. Historical and unknown status retained, later restrictions/restoration and legal outcomes distinguished.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a
institution-attributes/dod-claude-control: approved · agent reviewer codex-primary · 2026-09-12
Checked rubric and contextual evidence, including Augustcourt p17, MarchCIO pp27–29 and MaySenate pp59–68. Divided control is not remote veto; meaningful reliance is not structural indispensability; substitution ordinal remains unresolved.
Approval fingerprint: 1e7930e6d70cddee066b09a959f5046c89228cfdbf91ecb37db5b43d6212271a