Major AI labs like OpenAI and Anthropic cannot legally coordinate on safety standards or development pace due to the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits collusion. This legal barrier is a primary reason they are publicly calling for government involvement, as it would provide the necessary waiver to work together without facing antitrust litigation.

A major obstacle to coordinated AI safety efforts is the fear of antitrust litigation. Labs are reluctant to agree on pacing or sharing safety techniques because it could be viewed as illegal collusion. Zvi Mowshowitz suggests a simple government action would be to provide an explicit antitrust waiver for such collaborations.

Legal experts warn that an industry-wide agreement to pause or slow AI development could be interpreted as an 'invitation to collude' under antitrust law. This coordination among dominant firms to limit progress, even for safety reasons, could attract significant legal and regulatory scrutiny.

A significant barrier to voluntary safety pacts among AI companies is antitrust law. An agreement to slow development could be prosecuted as illegal anti-competitive collusion, as it would limit the technology available to consumers. This makes government-led frameworks essential for any coordinated industry action.

Acknowledging their safety plans might be inadequate, leaders from multiple frontier labs have begun to seriously entertain a coordinated slowdown. This represents a major shift, as they also explore legal "safe harbors" to collaborate on safety without triggering antitrust violations, breaking the frame of the current race.

The "Pacing the Frontier" letter, where AI employees ask for government-mandated slowdowns, highlights a prisoner's dilemma. No single lab can afford to slow down due to "competitive pressure" unless all are forced to do so simultaneously through regulation. This coordination problem is why they appeal to an external authority.

Major AI labs like Anthropic and OpenAI cannot legally form agreements to "pace" development without government approval. The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits such collusion, which could be seen as forming a cartel, even if the stated intention is safety.

A significant but overlooked barrier to AI safety is the threat of antitrust litigation. The US government could view industry coordination on pacing development or safety standards as anti-competitive collusion. This risk of legal action, especially from a hostile administration, disincentivizes labs from pursuing crucial, voluntary safety agreements.

The term "pacing the frontier" intentionally bundles two distinct concepts: creating a voluntary standards body and a coordinated slowdown of R&D. The latter raises antitrust collusion fears, which is why some leaders claim they need government waivers, while others argue they can act alone.