3 ms·
It's in the TOS, so no, not fraud. You might not like it that Anthropic doesn't want you running OpenClaw (effectively owned by a competitor) on CC, but that do
by insane_dreamer 6mo ago
It's in the TOS, so no, not fraud. You might not like it that Anthropic doesn't want you running OpenClaw (effectively owned by a competitor) on CC, but that doesn't make it fraudulent or criminal.
- rohansood15 6mo agoTOS is not an impenetrable immunity shield.
- jknoepfler 6mo agoIsn't this precisely the pattern of behavior that gets you sued for anti-competitive practices?
- gjsman-1000 6mo agoWhat? Seriously, not at all. Anti-competitive practices is when you go out of your way to use legal agreements or practices, in an illegal way (i.e. from the starting point of a monopoly), to deliberately restrict the ability to use competition. Openclaw is not a competitor with Claude. Anti-competitive practices would only occur here if Anthropic used some technique to prevent people from using Claude alternatives (i.e. if you install Claude Code, all other AI agents are forcibly disabled on your system).
- charcircuit 6mo ago>Openclaw is not a competitor with Claude Not Claude, but other Anthropic products such as Claude Cowork.
- theshrike79 6mo agoThis is exactly the same what Google does when it tries to prevent alternative Youtube clients by fiddling with the page design on purpose. Nobody is claiming anticompetitive there
- nickthegreek 6mo agoThe user did not do anything against the TOS. This isnt about running OpenClaw, its about having the words OpenClaw present in a file.