[Aurornis]

It's not analogous at all because Google intentionally provided interfaces for those clients and even instructions for using them.

An analogous situation would be if someone reverse engineered the Google Maps API and provided their own app that showed maps using the Google Maps data.

[rudedogg]

And if Google Maps charged per tile viewed, so the user pays the same amount regardless of which maps client they used, would your opinion hold?

I get that it’s a ToS violation, but I’m saying it shouldn’t be. They’re trying to make the harness the moat because they all have no moat.

[Aurornis]

> And if Google Maps charged per tile viewed, so the user pays the same amount regardless of which maps client they used, would your opinion hold?

Yes. Why wouldn't it hold?

Anthropic has a pay-per-token API. You can use OpenCode with it.

Maybe my consistency comes from having worked with contracts and agreements in the real world, where the end user doesn't get to pick and choose which terms they want to abide by.

When you sign up to use a service, you're not signing up to use it however you would like, on your own terms. You're paying for a service that they offer. They are not obligated to continue offering it to you if you try to use it a different way.

[Maxatar]

Anthropic has no issue with the use of OpenCode using Anthropic's API which does charge per token.