Facebook
Britain's News Portal
Around The Clock
BREAKING
Loading latest headlines…

Experts cast doubt on claims that China’s Kimi K3 copied Anthropic’s Fable AI

US officials allege Chinese firm Moonshot used unauthorised distillation of Anthropic’s Fable model, but AI researchers say the timeline and technical demands make that unlikely. The row highlights growing tensions over AI intellectual property and export controls.

  • White House science adviser Michael Kratsios accused Moonshot of stealing US AI technology via distillation.
  • Experts argue the rapid release of Kimi K3 just weeks after Fable’s debut makes pure distillation implausible.
  • The dispute raises questions about the effectiveness of export controls and the future of open-weight AI models.

The White House has accused Chinese AI company Moonshot of building its powerful Kimi K3 large language model by copying Anthropic’s Fable model through a process known as distillation, while using chips barred from export to China. Science adviser Michael Kratsios said in a social media post that the alleged theft of proprietary US technology was “unacceptable”, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed “watermarks” of US models had been found in Chinese counterparts. Neither official provided evidence, and Moonshot did not respond to requests for comment.

However, AI researchers are pushing back against the narrative. Braden Hancock of the Laude Institute and Snorkel AI told TechCrunch that the timeline alone undermines the distillation claim: Fable was only publicly released on 1 July 2026, and Kimi K3 appeared just two weeks later. “You can’t distill that much data, train a model, and release it in two weeks,” he said. Nathan Lambert of the Allen Institute for AI added that distillation via supervised fine-tuning is becoming less effective as frontier models grow more complex, and that replicating Fable’s capabilities would likely require reinforcement learning at a scale that is prohibitively expensive and slow.

Distillation typically involves querying a target model to generate training data, sometimes extracting its chain-of-thought reasoning. Lambert noted that while earlier Chinese models may have used distillation from Anthropic’s previous models — Anthropic earlier this year accused Moonshot, DeepSeek and MiniMax of systematic extraction — the leap to Fable-level performance in such a short window is not explained by that technique alone. He argued that the benefits of supervised fine-tuning are diminishing, and that genuine frontier-level distillation would demand tens of millions of reinforcement learning agents running against an API, which would be both costly and time-consuming.

The allegations come amid reported discussions in Washington about banning Chinese open-weight models, which has unsettled the global AI sector. For UK businesses and consumers, the row underscores the growing geopolitical friction around AI. The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office has previously warned that AI firms must comply with data protection law when training models, while the EU AI Act imposes transparency obligations on developers. If the US tightens export controls or pushes for a ban on Chinese open-weight models, UK companies that rely on such models for research or commercial applications could face disruption.

Experts caution that the focus on distillation may distract from the real story: Chinese AI labs are rapidly closing the gap through legitimate innovation. “I don’t think you get a model this strong and this quickly on the heels of Fable doing strictly distillation,” Hancock said. The UK, which has positioned itself as a hub for AI safety and innovation, will need to navigate these tensions carefully. The ICO has not yet commented on the specific allegations, but the broader regulatory landscape is likely to evolve as the US-China tech rivalry intensifies.

Why this matters: The dispute could lead to tighter export controls and restrictions on open-weight AI models, directly affecting UK businesses that use or develop AI tools. It also raises questions about the reliability of claims made in the escalating US-China tech conflict.

What this means for you: What this means for you: If you use AI tools at work or run a business that depends on open-weight models, changes in US export policy could limit your access to certain technologies or increase costs. The UK’s regulatory stance may also shift, affecting how AI firms operate here.

Related Articles

Get the news that matters.

Join thousands of readers getting the best of British news straight to their inbox.