This analysis describes what Meta'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
User ownership of Inputs and Outputs is qualified by applicable law, meaning ownership may not be absolute if local law limits it, and the provision does not affect Meta's separately granted rights to use Content.
The updated terms establish new obligations for developers integrating Meta's AI models into their products. The agreement now requires developers to comply with applicable AI labeling, disclosure, provenance-marking, and system classification requirements under applicable law, with responsibility falling on the developer to implement these disclosures to end users. The expanded definition of Inputs now explicitly includes code, libraries, databases, and any content accessed through connectors or integrations, which may broaden what user-submitted content Meta claims the right to process for safety and security purposes.
View change record →The updated terms remove developer restrictions that previously applied to large-scale platforms, meaning companies with more than 700 million monthly active users can now access Meta's AI models without special permission. The terms also eliminate the restriction on EU developers accessing multimodal models and consolidate account management under either managed accounts or Meta accounts. Developers previously subject to these restrictions should review whether the updated terms now permit their use case.
View change record →The updated terms authorize Meta to retain user-submitted content if its systems flag the content for a potential policy violation, in addition to retention tied to legal compliance and contractual rights. This expands the circumstances under which content may be preserved without explicit time limits. Under the revised language, content retention decisions may now be driven by automated policy-violation flagging in addition to legal or contractual necessity. Developers integrating the Llama API should understand that flagged content may be retained indefinitely pending policy review.
View change record →The reader retains ownership of their Inputs and Outputs as against Meta, subject to what applicable law permits, though this does not restrict rights Meta may have been separately granted elsewhere in the Terms.
How other platforms handle this
you agree not to enforce any "moral rights" in and to the Feedback, to the extent permitted by applicable law.
Except for the license you grant below, you retain all rights in and to your Marketing Content, as between you and ActiveCampaign.
You do not have any rights in relation to Member Content, and, unless expressly authorized by Tinder, you may only use Member Content to the extent that your use is consistent with our Services' purpose...
"Between you and Meta, to the extent permitted by applicable law, you own all rights, title, and interests in and to your Inputs and Outputs...and Meta does not claim any ownership of your Content.Excerpt from Meta's Llama API Terms of Service
Get the research letter
Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean.
User ownership of Inputs and Outputs is qualified by applicable law, meaning ownership may not be absolute if local law limits it, and the provision does not affect Meta's separately granted rights to use Content.
The reader retains ownership of their Inputs and Outputs as against Meta, subject to what applicable law permits, though this does not restrict rights Meta may have been separately granted elsewhere in the Terms.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 257 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Meta.