Google DeepMind Says It Won’t Enforce Lifetime Non-Disparagement Clauses Against Former Staff, But Current Contracts Unchanged

Google has told UK-based DeepMind employees it will not enforce lifetime non-disparagement clauses against workers who have left the company, following internal pressure and a Washington Post report on November 3, 2026. The company also said it has removed the post-employment portion of the clause from contracts for new hires. Current staff, however, say the clause remains in their existing agreements.

The clause and the catalyst

The issue came to light after former DeepMind research engineer Sofia Liguori, 32, spoke publicly in October about her resignation over Google’s military contracts. Liguori, who worked in London on the Impact Accelerator team optimizing power-grid efficiency, said her contract barred her from criticizing the company for the rest of her life [1]. She had objected internally to Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion Google–Amazon cloud deal with Israel, and to an April 2026 Pentagon contract allowing the U.S. Department of Defense (the Pentagon) to use Google AI for “any lawful government purpose,” including mission planning and weapons targeting [1][6].

Liguori told openDemocracy she was prepared to be fired for her activism but feared being sued by Alphabet, valued at roughly $3.5 trillion [1]. After she published her resignation letter, current UK staff checked their own contracts and found similar lifetime non-disparagement provisions. Coverage in the New Zealand Herald said dozens of employees joined an internal discussion; some posted a “1984” emoji in protest [3].

What Google has and hasn’t changed

A Google executive told UK staff this week the company would not pursue legal action against former employees who criticize the company or its AI products. A spokesperson told the Washington Post that the company has always encouraged an open dialogue about safety and responsibility, and that it recently updated terms for new hires to remove the post-termination aspect of non-disparagement clauses [1][5].

According to explainx.ai, which reviewed the Post coverage and subsequent reports, three things are confirmed: Google says it does not enforce the clause against former staff; new-hire contracts no longer include the post-employment restriction; and the clause remains in the signed contracts of current employees [3]. The Post said it reviewed one such contract. Google has not published the wording.

The distinction matters. A non-disparagement clause covers opinions and criticism, not just trade secrets. Unlike a standard NDA or a non-compete — which Google also uses “selectively” in the UK [3] — a lifetime non-disparagement provision can reach a plain statement such as “I think this contract was a mistake.” One current employee told the Seoul Economic Daily that a provision unenforceable in court “effectively exists to intimidate people” [3].

Military contracts and a pattern of dissent

Google’s stance on military work has shifted. In 2018, after 3,000 employees petitioned against Project Maven, a Pentagon drone-imagery program, the company declined to renew the contract and published AI Principles prohibiting weapons and surveillance applications [1][6]. Weeks after Donald Trump’s second term began in January 2025, those references were removed. DeepMind chief Demis Hassabis and research labs SVP James Manyika wrote that “democracies should lead in AI development, guided by core values like freedom, equality, and respect for human rights” [1][6]. Soon after, Google announced Gemini would be used at Lockheed Martin’s AI factory and expanded a Palantir partnership across Google Cloud [1][6].

Liguori and over 600 colleagues petitioned CEO Sundar Pichai against the Pentagon deal; they received no response [1]. In 2024, Google fired workers who protested its work with the Israeli military [3]. Staff who object to such contracts are the ones most likely to need freedom to speak, the Post noted [3].

Collective action and legal context

The concession followed organizing by DeepMind members of the United Tech and Allied Workers (UTAW), coordinated with the No Tech for Apartheid campaign and whistleblower nonprofit Psst [1][6]. Liguori called the move a win “because of collective action” [1]. It arrives as the UK’s Employment Rights Act 2025 takes effect, granting unions physical access to workplaces — likely aiding UTAW and Unite’s push for formal recognition at Google [1].

British law protects whistleblowers who speak in the public interest, but the practical effect of a lifetime clause is to deter speech regardless of enforceability. As explainx.ai’s analysis noted, a clause that stays in a contract can still shape what a person feels safe saying, even if the employer never sues [3].

What remains unknown

• Whether Google will amend existing contracts for current staff, not only new-hire terms.
• Whether the company will publish the clause’s exact wording or a written policy.
• How many DeepMind employees are bound by the clause; the Post cited two anonymous London workers, and coverage in the New Zealand Herald said “dozens” joined the internal thread [3].
• Whether other frontier labs with similar provisions will face comparable pressure.

Google did not respond to openDemocracy’s request for comment at time of publication [1]. For now, the verbal assurance is in place; the written contracts are not.