This analysis describes what Baseten's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision places defense and indemnification obligations on Customer for claims arising from alleged warranty breaches, including claims based on the allegation of a breach even where no actual breach is established, which creates exposure for Customer organizations in the event third parties challenge the legality or appropriateness of Customer Content or model deployments.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Customer Indemnification for Content and Warranty Breach and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →"Customer will defend at its expense any suit brought against Baseten, and will pay any settlement Customer makes or approves, or any damages finally awarded in such suit, insofar as such suit is based on a claim arising out of or relating to (a) an Exclusion, (b) the Customer Marks, or (c) Customer's breach or alleged breach of Sections 5.2 (Customer Warranty).Excerpt from Baseten's Terms of Service
Get the weekly coverage letter
Companies change their terms without announcing it. We capture governance documents, compare each new version with the last, and publish what changed, with the source text behind it. One email a week on what we found and what we could not reach.
This provision places defense and indemnification obligations on Customer for claims arising from alleged warranty breaches, including claims based on the allegation of a breach even where no actual breach is established, which creates exposure for Customer organizations in the event third parties challenge the legality or appropriateness of Customer Content or model deployments.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Baseten.