Anthropic takes legal action against OpenCode

Post by tekne » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 5:12 AM UTC

Covenant0028 wrote: post #369

faangguyindia wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude code might be subsidized but there are other risks Like if any agent can use claude models then it exposes them to distillation risk. Where data gathered from millions of such agent usage can easily be used to train a model, making their model superiority subpar Second thing is, to improve their own coding model, you need predictable input. If input to their model is all over the place (using different harness…

They are not entitled to a moat, and their customers do not owe them one. Several companies have narrow or no moats. Dell and HP are two examples when it comes to their PC business. This idea that companies should be allowed to lock down their products just so they can have moats, is how we ended up with printer ink being more expensive than crude oil or champagne.

Post by solenoid0937 » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 11:11 AM UTC

Daviey wrote: post #399

solenoid0937 wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazing how fickle people are. Yes, Anthropic are the baddies for not letting you abuse their loss leading product.

Can you help me understand how using Claude Code isn't abusive, but Opencode is? ('because they said so, isn't a good answer)

Post by solenoid0937 » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 3:13 PM UTC

Daviey wrote: post #404

solenoid0937 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude Code is a loss leader, you agree to use it under the terms that you don't hijack the OAuth flow to use other clients. If you don't like those terms you can use the API. Using Claude Code's auth flow with OpenCode is no different than using a custom client to abuse Gmail/Google Photos free tier as blob storage. You get a loss leading product under certain good faith terms, if you break those terms you're abusin…

You've still not explained why, you've just reasserted "because they said so". What is the upside to Anthropic if we use ClaudeCode but not OpenCode? If it is such a loss leader, why would they even offer it? By using it, even within their terms, you are still abusing their good will. No? (You also said the alternative to not liking the terms is to use their API. There is another alternative, which is to keep using i…

Post by Daviey » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

solenoid0937 wrote: post #405

Daviey wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've still not explained why, you've just reasserted "because they said so". What is the upside to Anthropic if we use ClaudeCode but not OpenCode? If it is such a loss leader, why would they even offer it? By using it, even within their terms, you are still abusing their good will. No? (You also said the alternative to not liking the terms is to use their API. There is another alternative, which is to keep using i…

> you've just reasserted "because they said so". Yes. That is all that matters. That is the contract you've signed with the business, end of story. They have their reasons (3P clients suck at caching, this is a subsidized tier to create subscription lock in, etc) but that's besides the point. If you sign a contract, you abide by its restrictions or you categorically abusing the offering. > There is another alternativ…

Post by skeledrew » Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 5:08 PM UTC

esperent wrote: post #338

skeledrew wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Sure you can. TOS docs are full of non legally enforceable wishful thinking bullshit, especially when they're written by an American company providing services to me in Europe. Most of the time they just expect (correctly) that they'll never get challenged in court over it.