Addressing Antigravity Bans & Reinstating Access

[jackwotherspoon]

Over the past week, we saw reports from Gemini CLI users experiencing account disruptions. These were the result of a series of Antigravity bans rolled out to address violations of the Antigravity Terms of Service (ToS), specifically the use of 3rd party tools or proxies to access Antigravity resources and quotas.

Because of the backend layer where abuse prevention occurs, bans for Antigravity usage also blocked access to Gemini CLI and Gemini Code Assist. We acknowledge the disruption this caused and are taking steps to restore access.

⏪ Bans have been reset

In coordination with Antigravity we are conducting a system-wide automated unban for accounts recently flagged for breaking ToS. This means:

• Immediate access: All currently affected accounts should see their access restored in a day or two.
• A reset: This is intended to clear the current backlog while we transition to a more transparent, automated compliance process.

🔄 New self-service reinstatement process

Going forward if an account is flagged for violating ToS, the experience will change:

1. User notification: Instead of a generic block, you will receive an email and see a specific error message in Gemini CLI pointing you to a dedicated Google Form.
2. Recertification: You will be asked to review our terms of service and formally recertify your intent to follow them, specifically acknowledging that bypassing system measures or circumventing usage limits is prohibited.
3. Automatic unban: Upon submission of the form, accounts will be automatically reinstated via a periodic sync process, typically allowing you to resume service within a day or two.
4. Permanent ban: If an account is flagged for a second violation of ToS, it will be permanently banned.

💡 Clarifying Gemini CLI ToS Policy

Using third-party software, tools, or services to harvest or piggyback on Gemini CLI's OAuth authentication to access our backend services is a direct violation of Gemini CLI’s applicable terms and policies.

We believe this new automated process provides a fair way for users who unintentionally broke the ToS to remediate their status while keeping our services secure and available.

Thank you for your patience and for your continued support of Gemini CLI!

[llkj11]

W

[segin]

The policy language needs to be updated to be less ambiguous around third-party tools.

[anxkhn]

They fear opencode and openclaw.

[izzoa]

@anxkhn opencode (and other third party tools/proxies) maybe; openclaw is just a bunch of mcp servers in a trenchcoat.

[verdverm]

OpenClaw is also the primary source of slop and low quality submissions to GItHub, HN, and beyond

[JoeGrimes123]

They fear opencode and openclaw.

I can't say for antigravity since its an closed source IDE but both gemini cli and opencode are OSS. I think if the cli team makes an agreement for an official integration in opencode like how its done with gh copilot and codex, that would be a massive W from google. They could still add some rules and exceptions like limits on subagent requests etc. to comply with the current server load.

Ion give a sh about openclaw. if you're going to use it fully on a production level, you should not be eligible for subsidized benefits of subs plans.

[antoniomonteirojr]

Appreciate the effort, but this only addresses part of the problem. Many paying Antigravity subscribers were permanently banned without warning for using third-party tools they didn't know were prohibited. Sent emails remain unanswered. We need:

• Full reinstatement for all affected paying users
• Clear TOS documentation
• A working appeals process

[jagtesh]

Didn’t the update just address these points (except for clear ToS, they make it vague to cover as much ground as possible)

[theRebelliousNerd]

It sure did! I'm happy I wasn't banned, I screwed up and when I realized it was against TOS I stopped

[hsaliak]

Can you clarify if https://developers.google.com/gemini-code-assist/docs/overview#supported-features Code Assist Standard is only to be used with Gemini CLI? I suppose I cannot use the AI Pro / Ultra account with any other agentic harness (Pi etc)?

[hsaliak]

Replying to self - I got an update on X that this API only supported in "official workflows". https://x.com/LyalinDotCom/status/2030429730663551269?s=20 which means that the answer to my question is at the moment - No, I cannot use this API with other Agents.

[grapexy]

We'll that's an amusing limitation. So there has to be a human behind cli, but in some cases, it also can be an automation, but not all automation.

[MAHDTech]

It's certainly a good way for Google to drive Devs to the competition.

I was working on a Google Gemini CLI extension that uses the Google Antigravity Cloud Code API so I could fill a product gap in their own products.

I wasn't using third party agents, I guess I was the third party in this case.

banned 💀

[klinki]

Thanks for clarification. Language of the ToS sounds strict, does that mean tools like https://www.openusage.ai/ are banned as well? From the language in ToS I believe so.

I absolutely understand that you don't want users to use OpenClaw etc. and you want them to use your products in the way you intended to. But the usage quota monitoring is terrible and absolutely not transparent at the moment 😭 so the 3rd party tools for usage monitoring are basically must-have. And I don't think they would cause any high load to your servers.

[funcieqDEV]

such a big W

[iziqing]

支持google毫不留情面的一本正经的打击哪些小偷小摸的坏分子

[KyleTryon]

This is how it should have been handled from the start but I am very happy to see the change and communication. This is fair.

[freakyflow]

Do you still ban the whole Google account (Gmail, etc) in case of a violation?

[ThoAppelsin]

This is definitely a big concern that must be addressed and addressed favorably for the user: The risk of losing access to my 15+ years of Gmail/Drive address/account/data is insanely big. That risk is simply absent in other players' offerings, because unlike you, they don't happen to own the company of my mail provider.

I cannot imagine choosing your offering in my right mind until you ensure the public that the bans are completely decoupled, i.e., any ban regarding Gemini/Antigravity will not impede one's access to any other Google service.

[JoeGrimes123]

no, at least not that I'm aware nor heard of. If anything, it's likely not related to Antigravity like logging in/out google multiple times and probably under different IPs could trigger the system flag as unusual/bot activity. Even then, you should be able to unlock from contacting support or simply completing a phone verification

[1e100]

That is but one grievance with Google Accounts that's getting addressed here. Could you maybe extend the same self-serve unban to all the rest of Google services, and not ban the entire account when you permanently ban from Gemini? This is the reason why I'm not even considering using Gemini at all - there's just too much riding on my Google account, and it's onerous to create another one just to be able to safely pay you money.

[ikidd]

What kind of people need to be told throwing bans around without warning or recourse is unacceptable before they fix it?

Honestly, it just proves yet again that using Google services for anything is too much of a risk for any individual or business smaller than F500 to take.

[chen-ye]

Can you clarify the terms for Gemini CLI in particular? It's an open source project; is connecting to Google OAuth via forks prohibited? What about wrappers which utilize the ACP functionality?

[sneak]

What's next, telling us which browsers we are or aren't allowed to use to load https://google.com?

It's an API. The client software is irrelevant. This is such nonsense.

[pashza]

Its not for api usage, its for oauth usage.
When you use gemini cli or antigravity with a third party tool - meaning authentication with the google account but not using a google tool (ie, using openclaw).
You can use openclaw with the api as much as you want, since you are paying for each token, while with oauth youre on a plan for google tools.

[CarlSR9001]

I pay 200$ to OpenAI and won't give a dime to google because of shit like this. Same with Anthropic, Nothing has changed in 26 years just because this is a "new" technology doesn't mean we're gonna put up with entirely new ways to be bilked. It's either full unfettered access through oauth or no money from me, and I wish other people would stop putting up with this bullshit.

[segin]

You can get that at API rates, the only correct way to do so.

[ness2u]

no no, this isn't a sane limit or reaction to put on the service, shame on google for setting those terms and again for enforcing them with bans. what feature-request could be more clear?!

the ban wasn't dished out for abuse, its for a less-profitable use of apis.

the comment is blunt, but correctly calls out google's ridiculousness imo...

[MissingTwins]

Its not for api usage, its for oauth usage.

Not true, just received ban from google, only used the API key for opencode to coding python for my Oscilloscope data analysis, absolutely not using OAuth at all.
Action required: Critical problem with your Gemini API project OpenCode

[rlewczuk]

So you are forcing your tools which aren't even safe, saw antigravity deleting user hard disk content and then apologizing for it. I'm using coding agent I've implemented for myself which places strict limits on what model can do and runs commands in rootless container. If I can't use gemini models with my tools in a cost effective way, I won't. Currently only Codex is available for me and I'm sticking to it. Also some Chinese open models, albeit less capable. Seeing Google or Anthropic actions I'm inclined to use and support Chinese models as much as I can, I cannot tolerate monopolistic behavior of western big tech.

[verdverm]

VertexAi is available for both Gemini and Claude models, as well as the open weight models you likely care about for a coding agent. A ton of models, all through the same API, auth, and billing. It's actually really nice.

[hmontazeri]

I don't get it. What do you care which third party service we use? We still pay the pro account. The quotas will still make sure we don't overuse the service. Instead of bans you should consider that ppl want to use products like opencode instead of Gemini cli bc it sucks. Id like to stay a pro user as I access ai service across my account but if I get banned I happily switch to a different provider

[verdverm]

The monthly plan is discounted, but requires you use their products. Every provider is doing this, absorbing some of the cost to promote their products.

Direct API access is available, but you have to pay by the token, which I'd argue is a good thing because it puts pressure on you to have higher quality instructions, agents, tools, and the like

[smashah]

The monthly plan is discounted, but requires you use their products. Every provider is doing this, absorbing some of the cost to promote their products.

Direct API access is available, but you have to pay by the token, which I'd argue is a good thing because it puts pressure on you to have higher quality instructions, agents, tools, and the like

Every provider is doing this

Literally not true. Openai and Github Copilot are not banning people for using OAuth with opencode. No need to be hyperbolic. This is fundamentally a direct 1-1 analogy to right-to-repair. If I pay for something, I get to use it as I wish. If Google, a trillion dollar company, want to set rate limits they are free to do that. Forcing devs to use their buggy IDEs/harnesses is a stupid requirement. If I order takeaway, the restaurant cannot force me to use their plates - this does not imply I somehow stole more food than I ordered from them. It's a very simple concept to get one's head around actually. This is a losing strategy for Google because it will not increase their subs. I appreciate the clarification but will continue with cancelling my Ai Ultra now that things are clear and I cannot use the inference I paid for based on my preferred tooling. Yes, there are people stealing food from the McGoogle's - but treating all of your customers like those criminals is not going to be rewarded with continued $250pm custom.

[brandonrwin]

If I pay for something, I get to use it as I wish.

No, this isn't how online services have ever worked. You're paying for a service strictly under adherence to a TOS, that you agreed to. Google (and Anthropic) offer token based plans, with a much less restrictive TOS, that are closer to what you're looking for.

[verdverm]

South Park has a good episode about the kinds of things that can happen when you click "agree" without reading the terms of service.

Most people will look at this and find it reasonable. There are abusers and a few people got caught up in it. Not the first context this has happened in, not the last time. I wonder what the ToS for the others say and if it's a matter of enforcement for them too. They can also be changed and I expect the industry to coalesce around this pattern anyway.

[smashah]

If I pay for something, I get to use it as I wish.

No, this isn't how online services have ever worked. You're paying for a service strictly under adherence to a TOS, that you agreed to. Google (and Anthropic) offer token based plans, with a much less restrictive TOS, that are closer to what you're looking for.

It was against the plantation owner's TOS to be a free man.

I cannot explain the human spirit of freedom to a corporate robot, unfortunately.

[crowdwave]

Being banned from programming by an automatic judge.

What a dystopian present - welcome to the future in which you are only allowed to program computers by the grace of Google/OpenAI/Anthropic. If their AI choose to kick you out then go get a job at the supermarket.

The real issue here is not to get people unbanned.

The real issue is to completely remove the concept of people being banned from programming without very significant oversight and recourse and general unwillingness on the part of Google to do so. Instead Google just builds it in...... hmmmm this maybe is crossing some counter/number/threshold, lets ban!

customer.account.banImmediatelyWithNoRecourse()

If Google had any real leadership they'd ban the ban except under the most utterly extreme circumstances. But that won't happen either - banning you from Gemini will just continue to be something the Google devs can throw in as some sort of error condition, or when their code doesn't understand something.

Google should treat its customers like parents treat their children - with kindness, empathy and understanding - and execution is not one of the methods that parents use for addressing children's behavior problems, unlike Google, where execution of the customer is simply a thing a Google developer might choose to implement by calling the "banCustomerForever" endpoint.

Again if there was any leadership at Google, that "ban customer account" endpoint would be literally removed so all the developers who have no understanding of consequences just don't have it as an option.

There's SO MANY other options for addressing issues and Google takes none of them

• they could send an email
• they could put a warning on the account UI
• they could give a 4 hour timeout from the service to ensure the message is heard
• they could phone you up or send a text message saying there's a problem
• they could impose some limit that prevents the behavior.

but no, at Google they would rather put their customer accounts up against the wall and pull the trigger.

There's just literally no human empathy to banning people from programming. Ironic.

Google's willingness to end people's development career has to get to to the Justice Department to bring it permanently to an end.

[metabench]

What about having non-Google bots use Antigravity? That does not 'piggyback' like direct use or misuse of OAUTH does,

[grapexy]

gemini-cli has a documented and fully supported headless mode, with programmatic stdio. Docs point out clearly that headless mode is for writing tools on top of it.

If opencode utilized gemini-cli's headless mode, would that be a TOS violation?

If yes, then what are the allowed use cases for headless mode?

[codegod100]

TIL

[CF5533]

I got suspended for headless mode + custom system prompt every 30 mins...
#20813

Note that I am not using opencode.
Just using my own system prompt for personal tasks.

[maple3142]

Is using forked version of Gemini CLI considered to be a violation of ToS?

[sneak]

From their repo:

Gemini CLI is an open-source tool that lets you interact with Google's powerful AI services directly from your command-line interface. The Gemini CLI software is licensed under the Apache 2.0 license. When you use Gemini CLI to access or use Google’s services, the Terms of Service and Privacy Notices applicable to those services apply to such access and use.

Directly accessing the services powering Gemini CLI (e.g., the Gemini Code Assist service) using third-party software, tools, or services (for example, using OpenClaw with Gemini CLI OAuth) is a violation of applicable terms and policies. Such actions may be grounds for suspension or termination of your account.

Sounds like "third-party software" would be software not written by you or Google, so I guess it technically depends on who made the fork? I think they mean "non-first-party", i.e. any software that wasn't released by Google. You'd probably get ToS'd for running a fork that you made that makes a lot of requests, even though that's not third-party (it's second-party).

Regardless, releasing free software under a permissive license, then saying "you can't modify it and continue to use it for its intended purpose (an api client)" is clearly directly against the spirit of free software, and they're just releasing the client as free software cosplay for marketing purposes, given that if you change it, you're not allowed to use it anymore.

(Anthropic, FWIW, doesn't even pretend - Claude Code, despite being npm-installable, is not free software and the source code it downloads from npm is heavily obfuscated and the license prevents reverse engineering.)

[JoeGrimes123]

@sneak yeah what I don't understand is how vague and unclear their ToS is about access to their services. imo forking the cli, make changes and still use their models should not violate anything. Even if the said fork heavily impacting their server loads, its their job to implement rate limits that can only be 'abused' by some illegal workarounds like reverse eng. That said I dont really agree on the "just a cosplay for marketing purposes". It's at least noble of them that they made this harness open source so folks can modify and use it however they like with local or 3rd party llms/providers, well that is if the cli isn't as bad when compared to others like opencode and pi

[stefan2904]

Is using an alternative coding agent harness (like pi) considered a violation of ToS?

If yes, any Pro subscription is kinda meaningless to me ...

[grapexy]

Currently, pi snatches OAuth tokens and goes around the apps, so that would definitely be a violation.

However, pi can also implement a provider that goes through cli (cli fully supports that). This is a documented feature of gemini-cli. Nothing would change in terms of behavior, it would be slightly more work to implement though.

But Google and Anthropic are being purposefully quite vague whether or not the latter is acceptable use. My guess is that if anyone starts going through cli, they'll say it's a ToS violation too.

[burdiyan]

You mean via ACP?

[DahTach]

I need to point out I only used Antigravity and Gemini CLI and I was still banned for days. No third party at all. The automatic ban on consecutive quotas exhaustion via official tools ( cause that is what I suppose happens ) should be clearly stated somewhere

[gustavo-cycling]

Sounds like a YOU problem. You offered an all you can eat buffet and panicked when people tried to make use of it, alienating your most passionate users in the process.

I was, for the first time in many years, thinking about getting a Gemini Pro subscription. After this, not a chance.

If I were you I would do two things:

1. Learn how to provide proper customer support. After 20+ years you still consistently have the worst customer support of all of big tech.
2. Replace Kent Walker with the simplest LLM you can run on Borg. During my time at Google I never met a single person who thought he had made any positive contribution to the company. The fact that he gets a hard on at the slitghtest prospect of doing business with the military is also very problematic.

[nickth3man]

How do I appeal and why was I banned in the first place???

[hmontazeri]

Just canceled my pro account. Well done google.

[sleep3r]

I only used the antigravity tools because Google's authorization was completely broken. And now I'm banned for it?

Just canceled my Ultra subscription. This is ridiculous. If your products actually worked, none of us would be dealing with this mess

[andresaraujo]

I think this has been very poorly managed, I got banned because I logged in once via pi, but never used it, I used it via gemini cli, it's been more than a day I appeal that and still nothing

I think it would have been better to just limit rate users using 3rd party tools, so we can take the correct path and use the 1st party tools instead of banning the users.

I guess will cancel the subscription if the appeal does not work

[andresaraujo]

Update: I got the account back. I wish gemini pro/ultra subscription was more open similar to what codex is doing https://developers.openai.com/codex/community/codex-for-oss where they explicitly allow to use opencode, pi, and other 3rd party tools with their sub

[andresaraujo]

Account is banned again, what I did? Jetbrains announced their new product https://air.dev/ which explicitly announces gemini-cli support, so given this is from trusted coding tool, I though this was fine, clicked on add gemini cli. I did not anything beside a dummy query to test the product, thats it now account is banned.

You really need to go after the companies not the users, many more users will get banned at this rate.

[aniruddhaadak80]

From my point of view, the new reinstatement flow is a step in the right direction, but the biggest gap still looks like observability for normal users. If someone gets blocked, they need to know exactly which action triggered it, whether it was quota related or policy related, and what concrete step will restore access. A clearer status page inside the CLI would probably reduce a lot of confusion and repeated support threads.

[codeleizy]

I also encountered the same problem. I subscribed to the Google One Pro package, but due to using OpenCode, my account was banned and there was no channel for appeal. Later, I posted a related post on the Google AI forum, but Google banned my account, which made me very disappointed. If it cannot be restored, I will also cancel my subscription

[bbhxwl]

I submitted the form for the first time, it has been 72 hours and he has not been unblocked.

[Abu-Maher]

Are you get unbanned bro?

[bbhxwl]

Are you get unbanned bro?

yes

[Abu-Maher]

Are you get unbanned bro?

yes

how long it takes you to get unbanned? because im in panic :(
sorry for questions...

[fenilmodi00]

Same issue here - both of my accounts (fenilmodi4820 [at] gmail.com and fenilgemini [at] gmail.com) were banned due to inadvertently using OpenClaw/OpenCode with Antigravity OAuth. I was not aware this violated ToS.

I have already:

• Sent appeal emails to gemini-code-assist-user-feedback [at] google.com from both accounts
• Uninstalled all third-party tools
• Revoked all OAuth permissions

Thank you for the system-wide unban announcement. Looking forward to access being restored. I will only use the official Antigravity IDE going forward.

[rohithreddy1095]

My accounts are still banned. I used google models inside pi and I was not sure I shouldn't be doing that. I wrote a mail to support team a week back and it is still locked and now I am not able to use gemini-cli or antigravity. I am gemini pro subscriber.

gmail : rohithreddy1095@gmail.com.

Request you to unlock.