Sorry, are you claiming that it's illegal (in the US, where Anthropic operates) for Anthropic to decline to operate on a repo that contains commits relating to OpenClaw?

Or just that in your opinion, it should be illegal?

Simply doing something anticompetitive is not inherently illegal, despite a lot of people thinking it is.

▲

nickthegreek 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It doesnt decline if you have API billing enabled, it straight up charges your request to API instead of Quota if setup (see $200 charge example below). This is happening if you have the words HERMES.md or OpenClaw apparently in the commit. In OP's example, it immediately depleted his session quota because of the words. That is not 'declining to operate'. Also, remember, it is the presence of the words. So if the commit was 'we dont do this, we arent openclaw', you are affected.

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/53262#issue...

	▲	margalabargala 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No, you're discussing a different issue. Related, sure, but not the same one. We're discussing the comment with repro by abdullin: > Immediate disconnect and session usage went to 100% Emphasis mine. I ran the commands and did not see session usage go to 100%. I simply got an error message. I don't have extra usage/API billing enabled. If I did, I wouldn't expect a "hi" to use all of my extra usage. In the link you sent, they genuinely used $200 of credits, they were just billed as credits not as subscription quota. So we have a couple different behaviors: - If API/extra usage billing is enabled, it uses that. - If API/extra usage billing is disabled, abdullin reports session quota going to 100% - If API/extra usage billing is disabled, margalabargala reports session usage not changing and errors refusing to do anything.

▲

Marsymars 29 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> (in the US, where Anthropic operates)

Locally, they also need to abide by the local laws and regulations of anywhere that they choose to sell their services.

▲

bdangubic an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

if I had a penny for every time I read on HN that should either "is" or "should be" illegal when it both isn't and shouldn't be... I'd be a very rich man :)