Your link doesn't suggest a violation of TOS, but rather a policy shift disallowing their major competitors to use their model for any use.

That thread you linked suggested they were using it with cursor as part of their development process, not for distilling.

>"Hi team, I believe many of you have already discovered that anthropic models are not responding on cursor. According to cursor this is a new policy anthropic is enforcing for all its major competitors."

▲

rgbrenner a day ago | parent [-]

Cursor might have framed it that way at the time, but 4 months prior Anthropic cut OpenAIs access under the same clause in the ToS: https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-revokes-openais-access...

And a month before the OpenAI block, they blocked Windsurf for the same reason: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johanmoreno/2025/06/05/anthropi...

So its pretty clear the TOS had this clause prior to Jan 2026.

	▲	frankacter 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Again neither of those links indicated usage that violate TOS beyond being a major competitor. They indiacte their development staff are using it, and they access it via API, then then go on to say all the nefarious things they "could" be doing, stopping before stating they actually are. Specifically the TOS violation was: >customers are barred from using the service to “build a competing product or service" So if you are building a competitive product, that alone is a TOS violation from their perspective. Which is fine and their prerogative, but we shouldn't cast a dark cloud suggesting other violations were happening without stated evidence. OpenAI publicly stated they can't "trust that xAI will use it within terms" not even that they've violated, not that there has been a violation from the Cursor team. https://www.teslarati.com/openai-cites-distrust-of-spacex-in... >OpenAI said the decision came down to trust, not technology. “We cannot be confident that SpaceX will use our technology within our terms of service"