A rule aimed at more than labels
The new restriction follows a wave of projects made with Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra. Tools such as Reverse Engineer Anything combine AI agents with reverse engineering, turning machine code into human-readable pseudocode.
The same appetite for rapid reconstruction has reached beyond games:
The issue is no longer only whether a generated image or video resembles protected work. Software can be taken apart, translated into a form people can inspect, and rebuilt. Anthropic’s rule targets the act of copying, including attempts to disguise a copy with a new name.
Where the boundary lands
Anthropic spokesperson Osmani said the company would continue changing its rules. The announcement does not explain how Claude Code distinguishes a copy from an original project, or how users can challenge a restriction they believe was applied incorrectly.
I think that uncertainty is the harder problem than the prohibition itself. A rule against copying is clear in principle; applying it to code can mean blocking legitimate work alongside imitations. If reports from users with original projects continue, Anthropic will have to show that its boundary is more than a ban that catches the easiest cases.
Daily AI news
Every day we pick what actually matters in AI and explain it plainly — no hype, no filler. Subscribe if you want to follow where the industry is going.
Only what matters — every day
Follow on X