4 ms·
not really. Here's their own product clarifying: Based on the terms, Section 3, subsection 2 prohibits using Claude/Anthropic's Services: "To develop any
by zzzeek 9mo ago
not really. Here's their own product clarifying:
Based on the terms, Section 3, subsection 2 prohibits using Claude/Anthropic's Services:
"To develop any products or services that compete with our Services, including to develop or train any artificial intelligence or machine learning algorithms or models or resell the Services."
Clarification:
This restriction is specifically about competitive use - you cannot use Claude to build products that compete with Anthropic's offerings.
What IS prohibited:
- Using Claude to develop a competing AI assistant or chatbot service
- Training models that would directly compete with Claude's capabilities
- Building a product that would be a substitute for Anthropic's services
What is NOT prohibited:
- General ML/AI development for your own applications (computer vision, recommendation systems, fraud detection, etc.)
- Using Claude as a coding assistant for ML projects
- Training domain-specific models for your business needs
- Research and educational ML work
- Any ML development that doesn't create a competing AI service
In short: I can absolutely help you develop and train ML models for legitimate use cases. The restriction only applies if you're trying to build something that would compete directly with Claude/Anthropic's core business.
So you can't use Claude to build your own chatbot that does anything remotely like Claude, which would be, basically any LLM chatbot.
- davorak 9mo ago> This restriction is specifically about competitive use - you cannot use Claude to build products that compete with Anthropic's offerings. I am not a lawyer, regardless of the list of examples below(I have been told examples in contracts and TOS are a mixed bag for enforceability), this text says that if anthropic decides to make a product like yours you have to stop using Claude for that product. That is a pretty powerful argument against depending heavily on or solely on Claude.
- ffsm8 9mo agoIt may or may not be enforceable in the court of law, but they'll definitely ban you if they notice you... And I'm pretty sure ban evasion can become an issue in the court of law, even if the original TOS may not hold up
- davorak 9mo agoThe part I quoted: > This restriction is specifically about competitive use - you cannot use Claude to build products that compete with Anthropic's offerings. Is more strict than the examples. The examples are what I think may not be enforceable. So for example: > What is NOT prohibited: > - General ML/AI development for your own applications (computer vision, recommendation systems, fraud detection, etc.) > - Using Claude as a coding assistant for ML projects If you use Claude for "General ML/AI development for your own applications..." and Anthropic puts out a specific product for "General ML/AI development for your own applications..." you probably can not use Claude for "General ML/AI development for your own applications..." and have to use the new specific product instead. Well as long as the example is not enforceable. The first quote looks enforceable and if I want to be on the same side I have to assume it takes precedence over the example.
- pdpi 9mo agoThis seems reasonable at first glance, but imagine applying it to other development tools — "You can't use Xcode/Visual Studio/IntelliJ to build a commercial IDE", "You can't use ICC/MSVC to build a commercial C/C++ compiler", etc.
- Spooky23 9mo agoIn this case it’s “You can’t use our technology to teach your thinking machine from our stealing of other people’s work, because our AI is just learning stuff, not stealing, and you are stealing from us, because we say so.”
- pixl97 9mo agoWhen it comes to AI stealing all IP in the world, I really don't give a crap. What I do give a crap about is the AI companies being little bitches when you politely pilfer what they have already snatched. Their hypocrisy is unlimited.
- dathinab 9mo agoyes but also the prohibition goes way further as it's not limited to training competing LLMs but also for programming any of the plumbing etc. around it ....
- oblio 9mo agoLOL, that's so much worse than I imagined. I know we want to turn everything into a rental economy aka the financialization of everything, but this is just super silly. I hope we're 2-3 years away, at most, from fully open source and open weights models that can run on hardware you can buy with $2000 and that can complete most things Opus 4.5 can do today, even if slower or that needs a bit more handholding.
- pixl97 9mo agoOpenAI, a while back said their was no moat. You'll see these AI companies panic more desperately as they all realize it's true.
- oblio 9mo agoThat's different, though. If 20 other companies can host these models, you still have to trust them. The end result should be cheap hardware that's good enough to large a solid, mature LLM that can code comparably to a fast junior dev.
- pixl97 9mo agoA more interim way to put it is "The current moat is hardware".
- walterbell 9mo ago> hardware you can buy with $2000 Including how much RAM?
- lukan 9mo agoI assume strongly, in 3 years the prices will have dropped a lot again.
- walterbell 9mo agoBecause of increased supply or reduced demand?