Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 418 posts

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#351

Post by croes »

bitpush wrote: post #236
croes wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay for snacks in the cinema and they lose money if you buy elsewhere. Where does Anthropic lose money when I use OpenCode?

This has been explained many times in this thread. Your subscription to Claude models for use in Claude Code is subsidized. That is, it is only meant to be used with that harness. When you use that API key with OpenCode, you're circumventing that.

That doesn't make sense.

The PS5 is subsidized because the make money with the games.

Printers are subsidized because the make money with the ink.

The API use is subsidized because they make money with Claude Code? I would understand if Claude Code could only be used with Anthropics API but not the other way around. 1 million tokens is 1 million tokens unless Claude Code is burning tokens and others are more efficient in token use.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#352

Post by kmijyiyxfbklao »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #333
FuckButtons wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is disingenuous, people want to be able to use a tool that they pay for to do useful work on their own terms because they payed for it and don’t see the differential pricing model offered by Anthropic as legitimate.

[flagged]

No, it's important. People are allowed to discourage each other from buying a product that they consider subpar.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#353

Post by bean469 »

skeledrew wrote: post #322
esperent wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anthropic has two different products that are relevant here: the Claude API and Claude Code. No, the two relevant products are Claude API vs Claude subscription. There's no "Claude Code subscription". There's just a subscription for all Claude services at once.

Their ToS says differently. You can't argue with what's explicitly in their legal agreement.

> You can't argue with what's explicitly in their legal agreement.

Sure you can, that's what courts are for

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#354

Post by FuckButtons »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #333
FuckButtons wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is disingenuous, people want to be able to use a tool that they pay for to do useful work on their own terms because they payed for it and don’t see the differential pricing model offered by Anthropic as legitimate.

[flagged]

I don’t agree, what people want is very consequential, because those people are paying customers of a service, if they aren’t happy with it they have every right to complain.

People should be vocal about what they do and do not think is reasonable behavior by corporations and then act based on those opinions with their wallets. Lord knows we have precious few other ways of influencing corporate behavior.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#356

Post by dns_snek »

ffsm8 wrote: post #314
exitb wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> including competing products like OpenCode I think that’s a bit more nuanced. The actual „product” is not the harness, which is free anyway, but the Claude subscription. In any scenario, that’s what the customer continues to pay for. I understand why Anthropic is doing that, but I feel no need to defend it. Just like I understand why Apple limits your app choices to AppStore, but I’m not going to go out of my way t…

It's way more nuanced, because the subscription is older then Claude Code - and they only started to have a problem with third parties using it after Claude Code. (And not with the release, just some time after the release)

That makes perfect sense because that's when it became orders of magnitude more expensive to offer the service.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#357

Post by dns_snek »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #333
FuckButtons wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is disingenuous, people want to be able to use a tool that they pay for to do useful work on their own terms because they payed for it and don’t see the differential pricing model offered by Anthropic as legitimate.

[flagged]

It's very amusing to hear this particular argument being made to defend AI companies.

When the people want that, it's inconsequential.

When the corporations did that, it was their God-given right.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#358

Post by vova_hn2 »

croes wrote: post #351
bitpush wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been explained many times in this thread. Your subscription to Claude models for use in Claude Code is subsidized. That is, it is only meant to be used with that harness. When you use that API key with OpenCode, you're circumventing that.

That doesn't make sense. The PS5 is subsidized because the make money with the games. Printers are subsidized because the make money with the ink. The API use is subsidized because they make money with Claude Code? I would understand if Claude Code could only be used with Anthropics API but not the other way around. 1 million tokens is 1 million tokens unless Claude Code is burning tokens and others are more efficien…

They want you to become dependent on Claude Code, so that later they can milk you.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#359

Post by mellosouls »

browningstreet wrote: post #160
awestroke wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they pay money for such crappy software?

This whole thread is people repeating wrong facts that have been clarified 100x in the previous threads on the same issue. I wonder why conversation can never progress. When a stake goes in the ground, it never ever comes out. FWIW OpenAI didn't buy OpenClaw.

"now at OpenAI" were my original words - they did the equivalent of an acqui-hire and "protected" OpenClaw in a foundation.

In the context of the seemingly aggressive machinations of Anthropic your hair-splitting without clarifying beyond "OpenAI didn't buy OpenClaw" seems itself misleading and rather counter to helping conversations progress.

Re: Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

#360

Post by deaux »

hirako2000 wrote: post #186
tim-star wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats only because kimi 2.5 was trained using data stolen from claude. it wouldnt exist without riding claudes coat tails. none of the so called 'open source' models would

That's not true, some open weight models didn't distill Claude or other then frontier models. E.g Llama. Yet achieved comparable performance (back then in llama's case). If distillation wasn't a thing, they would certainly exist, they would have trained them from scratch or via a decent base models to remain economically viable. What's for sure is that Claude wouldn't exist if it wasn't for data stolen from millions…

> E.g Llama. Yet achieved comparable performance (back then in llama's case).

At not a single point in history did Llama ever achieve comparable real-world performance to frontier models. I was around. At best they were earlier at benchmaxxing than the others.

Post reply on HN