Get the weekly 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. No account.
The policy prohibits using Stability AI technology to provide medical or health advice unless the output has been reviewed by a qualified professional and the use of AI assistance and its potential limitations have been disclosed to the recipient.
This analysis describes what Stability AI'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 creates an affirmative operational requirement for any product or service that surfaces Stability AI outputs in medical or health contexts, requiring both qualified professional review and AI disclosure before delivery to end users. Operators in digital health, telemedicine, wellness, or consumer health information sectors must assess whether their content pipelines satisfy both conditions.
Interpretive note: The policy does not define 'qualified professional' or 'essential services' with specificity, creating interpretive uncertainty for operators in adjacent sectors such as mental health, legal, or financial advice contexts.
Under this clause, consumers receiving health or medical information generated using Stability AI technology are entitled, under the policy's terms, to have that information reviewed by a qualified professional and to receive disclosure that AI was used and may have limitations. The agreement prohibits operators from delivering such content without satisfying both requirements.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Health and Medical AI Advice Disclosure Requirement and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Monitoring
Stability AI has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 20 platforms.
"provision of advice on essential services, including in the medical or health field, without review by a qualified professional and disclosure of the use of AI assistance and its potential limitations.Excerpt from Stability AI's Acceptable Use Policy
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision engages FDA guidance on AI-enabled medical devices and software as a medical device (SaMD) for operators in the United States, as well as FTC Act obligations around deceptive health claims. In the EU, it interacts with the EU AI Act's high-risk AI system classification for health applications and the Medical Device Regulation. HIPAA may apply where health information about identifiable individuals is involved. The document does not cite these frameworks explicitly. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. Operators in digital health, consumer wellness, insurance, or benefits administration contexts who use Stability AI outputs in customer-facing health information flows must implement qualified professional review and disclosure mechanisms. Failure to do so constitutes an AUP violation and may independently engage regulatory obligations under applicable health information law. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: US operators face FTC and potentially FDA exposure depending on product classification. EU operators face EU AI Act high-risk system requirements for health AI applications. California operators should evaluate CMIA applicability. The two-part requirement (professional review plus disclosure) applies globally under the policy regardless of jurisdiction. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: B2B customers deploying Stability AI in health-adjacent products should confirm their enterprise license agreements address this requirement and that their own downstream contracts with health professionals or review services are in place. The policy does not specify what qualifies as a 'qualified professional' in each health context, which may require interpretation in specific deployment scenarios. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Compliance teams in health-adjacent sectors should audit content delivery pipelines for Stability AI outputs to confirm qualified professional review workflows and AI disclosure mechanisms are in place before user delivery. The policy does not define 'essential services' beyond the medical or health field example, which may require legal interpretation for adjacent sectors such as legal advice, financial guidance, or mental health support.
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, and regulatory mapping built from archived source documents and historical version tracking.
This provision creates an affirmative operational requirement for any product or service that surfaces Stability AI outputs in medical or health contexts, requiring both qualified professional review and AI disclosure before delivery to end users. Operators in digital health, telemedicine, wellness, or consumer health information sectors must assess whether their content pipelines satisfy both conditions.
Under this clause, consumers receiving health or medical information generated using Stability AI technology are entitled, under the policy's terms, to have that information reviewed by a qualified professional and to receive disclosure that AI was used and may have limitations. The agreement prohibits operators from delivering such content without satisfying both requirements.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Stability AI.