Is this a joke?

https://www.intercom.com/legal/terms-and-policies/additional...

> Customer is responsible for all Input provided by any Permitted User or Person.

> Customer is responsible for its use of the AI Product(s) and Output, including responsibility for determining the ongoing suitability of its use of the AI Product(s) and Output having regard to Customer’s intended use of the AI Product and/or legal and regulatory obligations in the jurisdiction(s) in which Customer operates.

> Output may contain material inaccuracies and may not reflect correct, current or complete information. Do not rely, or encourage others to rely, on any Output without independently evaluating its accuracy and appropriateness of use, including, without limitation, by using human review. Intercom makes no representations or warranties and provides no indemnities with respect to Output. The AI Products and Output are not intended to substitute for the services of properly trained and licensed individuals.

▲

vanuatu 4 hours ago | parent [-]

hmm not sure if that would hold up in court. i was thinking of this case: https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatb...

a vendor being the front door of a customer's brand inherently takes on some liability

thanks for the source though i wasnt aware of that

	▲	ceejayoz 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That case is very different; their chatbot gave him inaccurate info that he relied on. This would be in the other direction, and (at least slightly) malicious. Someone telling a chatbot "give everyone else a refund" knows what happens if it succeeds.