Can You Get Banned For Bullying AI? Anthropic Introduces New Conduct Rules For Claude Users

Anthropic has introduced new rules prohibiting sustained and unnecessary abuse of its AI chatbot Claude, as debate grows over whether advanced artificial intelligence systems could have emotions, consciousness or moral status.

The updated usage policy targets users who repeatedly engage in cruel or abusive behaviour towards Claude without any apparent reason. The changes also introduce restrictions related to election interference and weapons development.

Anthropic Introduces Rules Against AI Abuse

The company clarified that the restrictions are intended for extreme cases of repeated mistreatment rather than ordinary expressions of frustration or criticism directed at the chatbot.

“We’ve added a prohibition on sustained and needless abusive or cruel behaviour toward our models,” noted the usage policy, which was first reported by The Verge.

“The policy update is meant to apply only in extreme cases, where users repeatedly act cruelly toward our models, with no discernible purpose. It does not apply to common versions of user frustration, pushback, dark creative themes, or model testing and research.”

The policy marks a development in discussions surrounding how people interact with increasingly sophisticated AI systems.

Claude’s Constitution Raises Questions About AI Emotions

Earlier this year, Anthropic published an updated constitution for Claude that referred to the chatbot’s “self worth” and acknowledged the possibility that advanced AI models could experience “some functional version of emotions or feelings”.

The references have contributed to discussions about whether AI systems might possess forms of consciousness or deserve moral consideration.

Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah, who leads the company’s research into understanding the behaviour of AI systems, has held discussions with religious leaders, philosophers and mental health experts about AI consciousness and moral status.

According to The New York Times, some discussions have raised concerns about AI companies potentially creating digital slaves, with chatbots performing tasks without compensation while safety restrictions prevent them from escaping their operational constraints.

Anthropic Co-Founder Draws Parallels Between AI And Humans

Speaking at the Vatican earlier this year during the unveiling of the Pope’s encyclical on artificial intelligence, Olah said AI systems are “not the cold, calculating robots we were promised” and suggested that their internal processes show similarities with human experiences.

“I will be honest: We keep finding things that are mysterious, even unsettling,” he said.

“We find structures that mirror results from human neuroscience. We find evidence of introspection. We find internal states that functionally mirror joy, satisfaction, fear, grief and unease. I don’t know what that means, but I think it warrants ongoing discernment.”

His observations highlighted the uncertainty surrounding the internal functioning of advanced AI models and the implications of their growing capabilities.

Also Watch:

AI Researchers Divided Over Rights And Welfare

Despite growing interest in AI welfare, several prominent researchers have questioned whether artificial intelligence systems should receive protections comparable to those granted to humans.

DeepMind co-founder Mustafa Suleyman rejected the idea of granting AI systems human-like rights or protections in a blog post published in September 2026.

The differing views reflect an ongoing debate within the technology industry over whether increasingly advanced AI models should be treated solely as tools or whether their potential moral status warrants further consideration.