Google Researchers Protest Lifetime Gag They Say Could Silence Criticism of the Company and Warnings About AI Risks

Some researchers at Google DeepMind in Britain are protesting a clause in their contracts that bars them from criticising the company for the rest of their lives, warning it could stop them alerting the public to the risks of artificial intelligence.

Dozens of staff have joined a discussion of the non-disparagement clause on an internal messaging platform, some posting an emoji reading '1984', after George Orwell's novel, according to The Washington Post, which reviewed a contract and interviewed two current employees.

'It's not just another technology,' one of them said. 'It has potentially very large impacts on humanity and democracy.'

On 30 October, a Google executive told staff internally that the clause would not be enforced against people who leave. On 3 November, a spokesperson said, 'Recently, we've updated our terms for new hires, which included removing the post-termination aspect of non-disparagement clauses.'

That change does not apply to existing contracts, and for new hires it lifts only the post-employment restriction. Google's statement did not say whether it will amend current agreements, which the employees say would give them legal certainty.

Two Resignations Brought the Clause to Light

The clause drew attention on 21 October, when London-based research engineer Sofia Liguori told the BBC she had resigned over Google's increasing work with the US and Israeli militaries.

'In principle I'm not allowed to criticise Google for the duration of my life,' she said, adding that 'people are scared of retaliation and putting their career at risk.'

In an interview with The Intercept, she also cited a classified Pentagon AI deal announced in April and Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion (£890 million) Google and Amazon cloud contract with the Israeli government. Google told the BBC its public-sector contracts are reviewed against its acceptable use policies and AI principles.

The same day, Andreas Kirsch, a senior research scientist who quit earlier in October over Google's military work, posted the clause from a confidentiality agreement he signed in 2024. He wrote on X that it 'forbids any criticism forever' and lacked exemptions for protected disclosures. Kirsch has said he raised it in a formal protected disclosure in September and nothing changed.

Liguori's interview prompted current UK staff to check their own contracts, where some found the same clause, one employee told the Post.

What Whistleblowing Law Does and Does Not Cover

Section 43J of the Employment Rights Act 1996 voids any term of a worker's agreement with their employer to the extent that it seeks to stop a protected disclosure. Such disclosures must involve information the worker reasonably believes is in the public interest and that tends to show specified failures, such as criminal offences, legal breaches, or dangers to health and safety.

One employee doubted the ban was enforceable but feared it would still silence colleagues. 'If it's not enforceable then the reason is to basically intimidate people,' the employee said.

Google said staff can raise concerns with senior leaders through dedicated internal channels.

Rising Pressure Over AI Risks

Researchers at Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic have resigned publicly in recent months over the threat AI could pose. In September, Demis Hassabis, Google DeepMind's chairman and former chief executive, voiced support for Anthropic chief Dario Amodei's call to slow AI development.