When using Cerebras's API, who owns your inputs (prompts) and the AI-generated outputs is determined not by Cerebras's terms but by the separate terms of whichever third-party AI model provider is being used — terms that Cerebras does not summarize or provide directly.
If you use Cerebras's API to generate content for commercial use, the IP rights to that content — and potentially your input data — are governed by a third party's terms that Cerebras does not provide or summarize, creating a significant legal gap for any commercial deployment.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle IP Ownership Deferred to Third-Party Model Terms and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Users and businesses cannot determine their IP rights in prompts or AI outputs solely from this document — they must independently locate, read, and comply with the applicable Third-Party Model Terms, which may be from Meta, Mistral, or other open-source or proprietary model providers.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: This provision engages copyright law (17 U.S.C. §102 et seq.) as it pertains to ownership of AI-generated outputs, an area of active regulatory scrutiny by the U.S. Copyright Office (see its March 2023 guidance on AI-generated works). GDPR Art. 28 is implicated if third-party model providers are processing EU personal data as sub-processors — the absence of an explicit sub-processing disclosure creates a compliance gap. EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) transparency obligations may require disclosure of model provenance and terms to end users in certain deployment contexts.
Compliance intelligence locked
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Watcher: regulatory citations. Professional: full compliance memo.