Take that, Trump

motorbiking said:
What do you think a license is?
Click to expand...
Not something being argued by Anthropic AI.

In case you didn't know, Trump has taken revenge on a company that refused to budge on its contractual red lines, by designating them a 'supply chain risk' which fundamentally affects their contractual agreements with them and other software companies.

The prohibitions (restrictions/red lines) were set out in their contact with the US government. I have read nothing about any 'licensing' issues.
 
motorbiking said:
what do you think will happen now.?
Click to expand...
It will join a long list of litigants against Trumps' revenge regime. In the meantime, Trumps' US will continue to replace law abiding, ethically sound governance with morally corrupt garbage. The standards will continue to decline and the world will look on and sigh and thank the Lord that there are less than three years left of the reprehensible scum.
 
Yes they will be forced to sue. In the meantime I suggest you use the product.

You could ask it what a software license agreement is.

Or more useful how to plan your retirement
 
motorbiking said:
I've now looked at the two in a bit more detail and assume that you are in the UK? the following applies. In general if the features were sold as part of the product description and have now been downgraded you have a claim within 6 years of purchase:

There are actually a few class actions claims agains the company for this, but as already stated Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies - you would bring a claim that the product was not (or rather no longer as described).

The same applies if the product claimed to have features which are now locked - I did note that they have released a non-subscriber mode for those who want to maintain the extensions.

Now this one did interest me, because on the face of it you have an unlawful act. If the original product relied on server side features to work, then you'd have a problem. The company that was liquidated, would be the one liable for the claim that the product was no longer as described (as above). You'd have to get to the bottom of if the company which acquired the assets, also acquired the liabilities. If so you have a claim, I'd give that 50/50. However, more interesting, if the product did not rely on server side services previously provided and the firmware push was to lock the product, then you actually have a possible criminal case, ranging from extortion to criminal damage.

If it previously worked and there is nothing in the terms saying it only works with HP ink, then there is a claim. However, I think the terms do say only HP ink, so you are stuffed. Of course, you could bring an anticompetitive claim.

The licence terms stated that it was not a perpetual license and they had the right to revoke.

as above.
Click to expand...


Yes - different countries have different degrees of consumer protection, and yes, some companies have rowed back in the face of public "outrage", but this remains essentially true:

morqthana said:
They do with consumer products.
Click to expand...
 
morqthana said:
Yes - different countries have different degrees of consumer protection, and yes, some companies have rowed back in the face of public "outrage", but this remains essentially true:
Click to expand...
Not legally. As I have pointed out. You either agree in the terms or they have no right to do it.
 
motorbiking said:
Ignoring your lack of knowledge on the subject for a moment, what do you think will happen now.?
Click to expand...

By designating them as a supply chain risk, Trump is giving Anthropic the choice of either being put out of business or changing their red lines. They are not being allowed to simply walk away. It is an extremely tricky position to be put in. One of the the top bods in this field (a right wing libertarian) who drew up the original contract with Anthropic on behalf of the government, calls Trump's behaviour 'fascism'.
 
Well they have walked away and given the makeup of investors, they are now focusing on non-defence usage. Both infrastructure investors have backed them for non-defence use. There are questions over the CEO's continuing leadership, because he really lacks the ability to sell based on his interactions.

It's a great product btw, the Financial analyser AI capability is beyond superb. £1,000s worth of quality, free advice. I've been quite lazy in managing my assets and will have more time to do this now.
 
motorbiking said:
Well they have walked away and given the makeup of investors, they are now focusing on non-defence usage. Both infrastructure investors have backed them for non-defence use. There are questions over the CEO's continuing leadership, because he really lacks the ability to sell based on his interactions.

It's a great product btw, the Financial analyser AI capability is beyond superb. £1,000s worth of quality, free advice. I've been quite lazy in managing my assets and will have more time to do this now.
Click to expand...

1772979590374.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top