4 ms·

I'll cancel my $100 / month Claude account the moment they decide to "approve my code" Already got close to cancel when they recently updated their TOS to say

I'll cancel my $100 / month Claude account the moment they decide to "approve my code" Already got close to cancel when they recently updated their TOS to say that for "consumers" they deserve the right to own the output I paid for - if they deem the output not having been used "the correct way" ! This adds substantial risk to any startup. Obviously...for "commercial" customers that do not apply - at 5x the cost...

aeon_ai 1y ago
Can you elaborate on the expansion of rights in the ToS with a reference? That seems egregiously bad
- oddmade 1y ago
  https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms "Subject to your compliance with our Terms, we assign to you all our right, title, and interest (if any) in Outputs." ..and if you read the terms you find a very long list of what they deem acceptable. I see now they also added "Non-commercial use only. You agree not to use our Services for any commercial or business purposes" ... ..so paying 100usd a month for a code assistant is now a hobby ?
  - foolswisdom 1y ago
    What is says there is > Evaluation and Additional Services. In some cases, we may permit you to evaluate our Services for a limited time or with limited functionality. Use of our Services for evaluation purposes are for your personal, non-commercial use only. In other words, you're not allowed to trial their services while using the outputs for commercial purposes.
    - oddmade 1y ago
      Take a look at "11. Disclaimer of warranties, limitations of liability, and indemnity" there is a section about commercial use.
      - oddmade 1y ago
        ..while their support chatbot claims commercial use is fine. Oh well
      - foolswisdom 1y ago
        I really don't know what you're talking about. There's nothing about commercial use in section 11 (nor does the language you quoted above appear anywhere in the Searching "business" and "commercial" makes it easy to verify this).
        oddmade 1y ago
        Section 11 point 4 "agree not to use our Services for any commercial or business purposes" I understand they want to limit their liability - so feel free to call me naive... I'm just old school enough to think that if I buy a tool - I'd have the right to use it and enjoy the results Imagine buying a bread knife and be told what bread you are allowed to slice ? Pizza needs an extended license. No pineapple allowed
        foolswisdom 1y ago
        > Section 11 point 4 You must be looking at something other than the terms of service you linked, because section 11 has no point numbering (and just in case, the fourth paragraph of section 11 says nothing of the sort).
nojito 1y ago
>This adds substantial risk to any startup. If you're a startup are you not a "commercial" customer?
- eru 1y ago
  I think this is talking about the different tiers of subscription you can buy.
  - oddmade 1y ago
    ..and the legal terms attached - yes
- oddmade 1y ago
  Well... ..in their TOS they seem to classify the 100usd / month Max plan a "consumer plan"
brutal_chaos_ 1y ago
https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ In the US, at least, the works generated by "AI" are not copyrightable. So for my layman's understanding, they may claim ownership, but it means nothing wrt copyright. (though patents, trademarks are another story that I am unfamiliar with)
- shikon7 1y ago
  But along the same argument you may claim ownership, but it means nothing wrt copyright. So you cannot stop them from using the code AI generated for you, based on copyright claims.
  - brutal_chaos_ 1y ago
    Wouldn't that mean everyone owns it then (wrt copyright)? Not just the generator and Anthropic?
    - shagie 1y ago
      It means the person who copyrighted it still has the copyright on it. However, using AI generated code in some project that passes the threshold of being copyrightable can be problematic and "the AI wrote it for me" isn't a defense in a copyright claim.
- tbrownaw 1y ago
  There's a difference between an AI acting on it's own, vs a person using AI as a tool. And apparently the difference is fuzzy instead of having a clear line somewhere. I wonder if any appropriate-specialty lawyers have written publicly about those AI agents that can supposedly turn a bug report or enhancement request into a PR...
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
sitkack 1y ago
They are already trolling for our prompting techniques, now they are lifting our results. Great.

aeon_ai 1y ago

Can you elaborate on the expansion of rights in the ToS with a reference? That seems egregiously bad

oddmade 1y ago
https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms https://www.anthropic.com/legal/consumer-terms "Subject to your compliance with our Terms, we assign to you all our right, title, and interest (if any) in Outputs." ..and if you read the terms you find a very long list of what they deem acceptable. I see now they also added "Non-commercial use only. You agree not to use our Services for any commercial or business purposes" ... ..so paying 100usd a month for a code assistant is now a hobby ?
- foolswisdom 1y ago
  What is says there is > Evaluation and Additional Services. In some cases, we may permit you to evaluate our Services for a limited time or with limited functionality. Use of our Services for evaluation purposes are for your personal, non-commercial use only. In other words, you're not allowed to trial their services while using the outputs for commercial purposes.
  - oddmade 1y ago
    Take a look at "11. Disclaimer of warranties, limitations of liability, and indemnity" there is a section about commercial use.
    - oddmade 1y ago
      ..while their support chatbot claims commercial use is fine. Oh well
    - foolswisdom 1y ago
      I really don't know what you're talking about. There's nothing about commercial use in section 11 (nor does the language you quoted above appear anywhere in the Searching "business" and "commercial" makes it easy to verify this).
      - oddmade 1y ago
        Section 11 point 4 "agree not to use our Services for any commercial or business purposes" I understand they want to limit their liability - so feel free to call me naive... I'm just old school enough to think that if I buy a tool - I'd have the right to use it and enjoy the results Imagine buying a bread knife and be told what bread you are allowed to slice ? Pizza needs an extended license. No pineapple allowed
        foolswisdom 1y ago
        > Section 11 point 4 You must be looking at something other than the terms of service you linked, because section 11 has no point numbering (and just in case, the fourth paragraph of section 11 says nothing of the sort).

nojito 1y ago

>This adds substantial risk to any startup. If you're a startup are you not a "commercial" customer?

eru 1y ago
I think this is talking about the different tiers of subscription you can buy.
- oddmade 1y ago
  ..and the legal terms attached - yes
oddmade 1y ago
Well... ..in their TOS they seem to classify the 100usd / month Max plan a "consumer plan"

brutal_chaos_ 1y ago

https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ In the US, at least, the works generated by "AI" are not copyrightable. So for my layman's understanding, they may claim ownership, but it means nothing wrt copyright. (though patents, trademarks are another story that I am unfamiliar with)

shikon7 1y ago
But along the same argument you may claim ownership, but it means nothing wrt copyright. So you cannot stop them from using the code AI generated for you, based on copyright claims.
- brutal_chaos_ 1y ago
  Wouldn't that mean everyone owns it then (wrt copyright)? Not just the generator and Anthropic?
  - shagie 1y ago
    It means the person who copyrighted it still has the copyright on it. However, using AI generated code in some project that passes the threshold of being copyrightable can be problematic and "the AI wrote it for me" isn't a defense in a copyright claim.
tbrownaw 1y ago
There's a difference between an AI acting on it's own, vs a person using AI as a tool. And apparently the difference is fuzzy instead of having a clear line somewhere. I wonder if any appropriate-specialty lawyers have written publicly about those AI agents that can supposedly turn a bug report or enhancement request into a PR...
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

sitkack 1y ago

They are already trolling for our prompting techniques, now they are lifting our results. Great.