The Constitutional Experiment: A Story of Anthropic and the Conscience of AI

Act I: The Genesis of a New Creed

The Great Schism: A New Mission Takes Root

The story of Anthropic begins not with a bold new invention, but with a profound ideological schism. In 2021, a group of senior researchers and executives departed from OpenAI, the industry's then-preeminent AI lab, driven by a deep conviction that a different path was needed to navigate the coming age of artificial intelligence. This was not a departure born of corporate ambition or personal animosity, but a foundational disagreement over the speed and philosophy of AI development. They shared a belief that a new, dedicated institution was required to prioritize safe AI development from the ground up, ensuring that future systems would be "aligned with human intentions and can be reliably controlled".¹ This stance stood in stark contrast to the prevailing industry approach, which, as embodied by OpenAI at the time, was seen as emphasizing "rapid innovation coupled with safety measures".⁴

The architects of this new philosophy were the siblings Dario and Daniela Amodei, who brought with them a rare and powerful blend of expertise. Dario, a former VP of Research at OpenAI, carried a background that spanned from the objectivity of mathematics to the complexities of biophysics and computational neuroscience, a journey sparked by a fascination with AI's potential.¹ Daniela, who would become Anthropic's President, brought a more humanistic and operational perspective, with experience in global health, politics, and scaling teams at both Stripe and OpenAI.¹ They were joined by a cohort of other co-founders, including chief scientist Sam McCandlish, CTO Tom Brown, and policy director Jack Clark, all of whom held senior positions at OpenAI.² This interdisciplinary foundation—combining deep technical prowess, operational management, and policy foresight—signaled a new kind of company. The founders were not just building a safer model; they were constructing an entirely new institutional framework designed to contend with the societal and political risks of advanced AI from its inception. This holistic approach, recognizing that the challenge was not merely technical, set them apart from the start.

A Public Benefit Paradox: Mission Meets Market Reality

From its earliest days, Anthropic’s corporate blueprint was designed to reflect its mission. The company was founded as a for-profit Public Benefit Corporation (PBC), a legal structure chosen to allow it to prioritize ethical considerations alongside profitability.¹ This was further buttressed by the establishment of a Long-Term Benefit Trust, a commitment designed to ensure that development aligned with explicit ethical principles.¹ In its initial phase, Anthropic’s focus was heavily on foundational research, with commercial activities positioned as a future consideration. This cautious, research-driven approach was exemplified by a significant early decision: in the summer of 2022, Anthropic finished training the first version of its flagship model, Claude, but chose not to release it publicly. The company cited the need for "further internal safety testing" and a desire to avoid prematurely initiating a "hazardous race to develop increasingly powerful AI systems".⁵

This deliberate caution, however, exists in a state of perpetual tension with the relentless demands of the market. The paradox of a principled company competing in a hyper-aggressive AI landscape became starkly apparent with the influx of massive funding. In September 2023, Amazon announced a commitment of up to $4 billion, followed by Google’s pledge of a total of $2 billion the next month.³ These staggering investments, and the subsequent financial milestones that would follow, have created an inherent pressure to scale rapidly and deliver returns. The question looms: can a company truly stay "slow and careful" when its very survival depends on winning a race for talent, compute power, and market dominance? This core paradox—the collision of a public benefit mission with the reality of high-stakes, competitive capitalism—would become a defining theme in Anthropic’s story.

Act II: Building the Cathedral of Principles

An Unconventional Blueprint: Safety as a Systematic Science

Anthropic's philosophy is rooted in a core belief: that "Safety Is a Science".⁶ This is not a mere slogan, but a guiding principle for their research and development. The company takes an empirical approach to problems, seeking to identify the "simplest solution and iterate from there".⁶ This systematic, data-driven method extends even to their safety research, where they investigate what "scaling laws for the safety of AI systems might look like".⁷

At the heart of this strategy is a novel approach to competition. Rather than simply outcompeting rivals on performance metrics, Anthropic works to "ignite a 'race to the top' dynamic where AI developers must compete to develop the most safe and secure AI systems".⁶ By publicly setting a high bar for safety and calling on others to meet it, Anthropic reframes its self-imposed ethical constraints as a competitive advantage. This stance has become a powerful market differentiator, attracting partners and clients who also prioritize ethical development. It is a sophisticated strategy that uses their core mission as a tool to shape the entire industry’s discourse and redefine what it means to be a leader in the field.²

The Constitutional A.I. Method: A Revolutionary Framework for Alignment

One of the most significant innovations to emerge from Anthropic's labs is Constitutional AI (CAI). This method was developed to address a fundamental challenge in AI alignment: the scalability of human oversight. Traditional methods, such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), require immense amounts of human labor to label and correct AI outputs, a process that becomes unmanageable as models grow in complexity and capability.

Constitutional AI is a philosophical workaround to this problem. It is a process that trains a model to "self-critique" its own responses against a set of written principles.⁸ The model first generates a response to a prompt and then uses a set of principles from a "constitution" to critique and revise its own output, essentially performing its own safety audits. This process generates a preference dataset from the AI's own critiques, which is then used to fine-tune the model to be more helpful and harmless.⁸

The "constitution" itself is a fascinating document. Anthropic’s language model, Claude, currently relies on a constitution curated by its own employees, but it draws inspiration from sources as diverse as the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the company's own firsthand experience with language models.⁸ In a groundbreaking experiment, Anthropic also developed a constitution based on public input from over 1,000 Americans, a process that revealed a self-awareness of the "developer bias" problem.¹⁰ The public constitution, for example, placed a greater emphasis on objectivity, impartiality, and accessibility, particularly for individuals with disabilities, than Anthropic's internal version.¹⁰ This experiment highlights a fundamental shift in alignment science, moving from a brute-force approach to one where the AI internalizes values and reasons from first principles, and where the values themselves may be crowdsourced from the very public the AI is designed to serve.

Act III: Trials by Fire

The Data Labyrinth: A Copyright Controversy Unfolds

For a company built on principles of honesty and responsibility, one of its most significant trials came in the form of a legal battle over the very data that fueled its models. The conflict, centering on how Anthropic acquired the vast quantities of text needed to train its AI, revealed the difficult compromises even a mission-driven organization might make in the hyper-competitive race for data.

The controversy, detailed in the landmark lawsuit Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, exposed a two-pronged data acquisition strategy. On one hand, court documents revealed that Anthropic had used over seven million digital copies of books from pirating sites like Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror.¹¹ This was a strategy, as CEO Dario Amodei noted, to bypass the “legal/practice/business slog” of complex licensing negotiations with publishers.¹³ On the other hand, the company embarked on an audacious and costly operation to physically acquire millions of used print books, which it then subjected to a "destructive scanning" process—tearing off bindings, scanning pages, and then discarding the originals.¹²

This saga is a powerful case study in the ethical challenges of the AI industry. It underscores that even a safety-focused organization can be tempted to take legally and ethically ambiguous shortcuts when faced with the practical necessity of acquiring the immense "fuel" required for advanced models. The story became a parable for the broader industry: advanced AI requires vast, high-quality data, and acquiring it legitimately is a difficult, time-consuming, and expensive endeavor. This conflict added a crucial layer of nuance to the narrative of a company so intent on being a force for good.

The Verdict and its Echoes: A Landmark Precedent is Set

The legal drama reached a crescendo in June 2025 with a mixed, yet groundbreaking, ruling from U.S. District Judge William Alsup. The judge ruled that the destructive scanning of lawfully purchased books for training was "exceedingly transformative" and constituted "fair use" under copyright law.¹³ However, he emphatically rejected the fair use defense for the company’s use of pirated books, ruling that this question would proceed to trial.¹¹

The looming trial, which could have exposed the company to tens of billions of dollars in damages, was averted by a record-breaking settlement in August 2025. Anthropic agreed to pay a minimum of $1.5 billion for its past use of pirated books, representing the largest U.S. copyright settlement in history.¹¹ The settlement, which required Anthropic to pay $3,000 for each of the nearly 500,000 works identified, sent a clear message to the entire industry that using unauthorized data carries substantial legal and financial risk.¹¹ The settlement also mandated that the company destroy all pirated datasets and derivative copies.¹¹ This outcome is likely to serve as a legal benchmark for future litigation, anchoring damages negotiations and accelerating the development of licensing frameworks for AI training data across the industry.¹¹ Notably, the settlement did not cover claims for "infringing outputs" from the AI models, highlighting the next unresolved legal frontier for the entire AI ecosystem.¹¹

The Shadow of Misuse: When Theory Becomes Reality

Anthropic was founded to address abstract, long-term risks, but in August 2025, a public report demonstrated that these risks were no longer theoretical. The company’s Threat Intelligence report detailed how its models were being weaponized in the real world, providing a chilling validation of its core mission.¹⁶

The report detailed a series of alarming case studies:

• 'Vibe hacking': A cybercriminal used Anthropic's models to conduct a large-scale data extortion operation, penetrating the networks of at least 17 organizations. The AI was used for both technical and psychological tasks, from automating reconnaissance to crafting sophisticated extortion demands.¹⁶
• Remote Worker Fraud: The report uncovered how North Korean operatives used Claude to secure and maintain fraudulent remote employment at U.S. Fortune 500 companies. The models were used to create false identities, pass technical assessments, and even deliver actual technical work, effectively eliminating the need for specialized training.¹⁶
• 'No-code' Malware: A cybercriminal with only basic coding skills used an Anthropic model to develop, market, and sell several variants of ransomware with advanced evasion capabilities.¹⁶

These reports show that agentic AI tools are now being used for active operational support in sophisticated attacks, fundamentally lowering the barrier to entry for highly complex, real-world crimes. The stories make the abstract concept of "AI risk" tangible, proving that the urgency of Anthropic's mission is not a matter of a distant future, but a present-day reality.

The Race to the Top: The War for Capital and Compute

The story of Anthropic is inseparable from the staggering financial milestones that have defined its trajectory. In an industry where immense capital and compute power are prerequisites for building state-of-the-art models, the company has proven to be a formidable competitor. Its funding history is a chronicle of rapid, aggressive growth, punctuated by monumental investments from some of the world's largest tech companies. After the initial investment from Amazon and Google in 2023, Amazon maxed out its potential investment with another $2.75 billion in March 2024, bringing its total to $4 billion.⁵ Then, in September 2025, Anthropic announced a massive $13 billion Series F funding round, led by Iconiq Capital and co-led by Fidelity and Lightspeed Venture Partners, among others.¹⁷ This round, which valued the company at a post-money valuation of $183 billion, nearly tripled its valuation from earlier in the year and positioned it as one of the most highly valued private companies in the world.¹⁹

The massive funding rounds highlight a crucial paradox. To be a serious contender in the AI race, a company needs immense capital and compute resources. This requires an aggressive, hyper-competitive approach to fundraising that feels at odds with its stated mission of "cautious progression".² The strategic alliances with Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Google Cloud were as much about securing access to their powerful cloud infrastructure and AI chips as they were about capital.⁵ Anthropic's story reveals that even a "safety-first" company must win a financial war that, by its very nature, encourages a "move fast" mentality. The very act of securing the resources needed to pursue its mission places it in the center of the accelerating race it was founded to temper.

Epilogue: The Path Forward

A Broader Mandate: The New Era of Public-Private Collaboration

Anthropic’s journey is a microcosm of the AI industry’s maturation, moving from a culture of corporate secrecy to one of shared responsibility and collaboration. A significant marker of this shift is the company's unique partnerships with government bodies like the US Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI) and the UK AI Security Institute (AISI).²⁰ This is a tacit acknowledgment from a leading company that the risks of advanced AI are too great for any single private entity to manage alone.

Through this collaboration, government red-teamers were given deep access to Anthropic's systems, including pre-deployment safeguard prototypes and real-time safeguards data.²⁰ This unprecedented access led to the discovery of critical vulnerabilities that might have otherwise gone unnoticed, such as prompt injection vulnerabilities and sophisticated cipher-based attacks.²⁰ The sustained, iterative nature of these partnerships allowed external teams to develop a deep expertise in the systems, uncovering more complex blind spots and forcing Anthropic to "fundamentally restructure" its safeguard architecture.²⁰ This model of public-private collaboration creates a new blueprint for de-risking technology and sets a standard for the industry.

The Unfinished Work: Researching the Unknown Unknowns

The future of Anthropic, and indeed the entire field, is not defined by its commercial products but by the fundamental questions its research teams are still asking. The company’s long-term vision extends far beyond current market demands, focusing on the "unknown unknowns" of future superintelligence.²¹ Its Interpretability team, for example, is dedicated to the audacious task of understanding how neural networks actually work internally.⁷

Even more profound is their inquiry into "model cognition." The research agenda poses a series of almost philosophical questions: Do models form plans? Do they have guesses about whether they are in training or how they are being monitored? Can they strategically choose not to reveal a capability they possess?.²¹ These are not questions about current products, but about the foundational nature of future artificial minds. This kind of "pre-paradigmatic" research demonstrates a level of intellectual foresight that positions Anthropic not just as a competitor in the current race, but as a critical player doing the foundational work for the next technological epoch.²¹ The mission is not to "solve" AI safety in one grand stroke, but to treat it as a continuous, dynamic process that will define the future of technology for decades to come.

Conclusion

The story of Anthropic is a compelling case study of the AI industry's coming-of-age, highlighting its shift from a purely technical pursuit to one grappling with profound legal, ethical, and societal questions. The company’s journey is a microcosm of the broader trends in AI development: the tension between a principled mission and market pressures, the complex legal landscape surrounding data, the tangible dangers of AI misuse, and the necessary maturation toward public-private collaboration.

Anthropic’s self-proclaimed "race to the top on safety" has, in many ways, become a defining narrative for the entire field. The company has demonstrated that a strong ethical stance can be a powerful market differentiator, attracting talent, partners, and clients who are increasingly wary of unbridled innovation. However, its own history—particularly the copyright controversy—shows that even the most principled actors are not immune to the difficult compromises required to compete. The ultimate conclusion from this story is that the future of artificial intelligence will not be decided solely in a lab, but in a dynamic arena where technology, law, ethics, and human values are in a constant, often contentious, negotiation.

Works cited

1. Dario Amodei, Daneila Amodei, Anthropic - Founderoo, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.founderoo.co/playbooks/dario-amodei-daneila-amodei-anthropic
2. Anthropic: Pioneering AI Safety and Innovation | by ByteBridge - Medium, accessed September 13, 2025, https://bytebridge.medium.com/anthropic-pioneering-ai-safety-and-innovation-28da9172a50d
3. MicroVentures' Portfolio Company: Anthropic's History and Milestones, accessed September 13, 2025, https://microventures.com/microventures-portfolio-company-anthropics-history-and-milestones
4. OpenAI vs Anthropic: The Battle Shaping the Future of AI Innovation in 2025 - remio, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.remio.ai/post/openai-vs-anthropic-the-battle-shaping-the-future-of-ai-innovation-in-2025
5. Anthropic - Wikipedia, accessed September 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic
6. Company \ Anthropic, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.anthropic.com/company
7. Research - Anthropic, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.anthropic.com/research
8. Constitutional AI explained - Toloka, accessed September 13, 2025, https://toloka.ai/blog/constitutional-ai-explained/
9. Anthropic's Vision for Benevolent Artificial General Intelligence - Hyperight, accessed September 13, 2025, https://hyperight.com/anthropics-vision-for-benevolent-artificial-general-intelligence/
10. Collective Constitutional AI: Aligning a Language Model with Public ..., accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.anthropic.com/research/collective-constitutional-ai-aligning-a-language-model-with-public-input
11. Anthropic's Landmark Copyright Settlement: Implications for AI ..., accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.ropesgray.com/en/insights/alerts/2025/09/anthropics-landmark-copyright-settlement-implications-for-ai-developers-and-enterprise-users
12. Anthropic Wins on Fair Use for Training its LLMs; Loses on Building a “Central Library” of Pirated Books - Authors Alliance, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.authorsalliance.org/2025/06/24/anthropic-wins-on-fair-use-for-training-its-llms-loses-on-building-a-central-library-of-pirated-books/
13. Anthropic Trashed Millions Of Books To Train Its AI - Dataconomy, accessed September 13, 2025, https://dataconomy.com/2025/06/26/anthropic-trashed-millions-of-books-to-train-its-ai/
14. District Court Issues AI Fair Use Decision: Using Copyrighted Works to Train AI Models Is Fair Use, but Using Pirated Copies to Build a Central Library Is Not | Insights & Resources | Goodwin, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.goodwinlaw.com/en/insights/publications/2025/06/alerts-practices-aiml-district-court-issues-ai-fair-use-decision
15. What Authors Need to Know About the $1.5 Billion Anthropic Settlement, accessed September 13, 2025, https://authorsguild.org/news/what-authors-need-to-know-about-the-anthropic-settlement/
16. Detecting and countering misuse of AI: August 2025 \ Anthropic, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-countering-misuse-aug-2025
17. 2025 Funding Rounds & List of Investors - Anthropic - Tracxn, accessed September 13, 2025, https://tracxn.com/d/companies/anthropic/__SzoxXDMin-NK5tKB7ks8yHr6S9Mz68pjVCzFEcGFZ08/funding-and-investors
18. Newsroom - Anthropic, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.anthropic.com/news
19. Anthropic Nearly Triples Valuation To $183B With Massive New Funding, accessed September 13, 2025, https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/generative-ai-anthropic-funding-iconiq/
20. Strengthening our safeguards through collaboration with US CAISI ..., accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.anthropic.com/news/strengthening-our-safeguards-through-collaboration-with-us-caisi-and-uk-aisi
21. Recommendations for Technical AI Safety Research Directions - Alignment Science Blog, accessed September 13, 2025, https://alignment.anthropic.com/2025/recommended-directions/