Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by dheerajmp | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

dheerajmp

Source here https://github.com/chatgptprojects/claude-code/

View on HN

https://github.com/instructkr/claude-code

this one has more stars and more popular

won't they just try to dmca or take these down especially if they're more popular

They can't. AI generated code cannot be copyrighted. They've stated that claude code is built with claude code. You can take this and start your own claude code project now if you like. There's zero copyright protection on this.

Given that from 2026 onwards most of the code is going to be computer generated, doesn't it open some interesting implications there ?

It's undetermined if code will be majority written by machines, especially as people start to realize how harmful these tools are without extreme diligence. Outages at Cloudflare, AWS, GitHub, etc are just the beginning. Companies aren't going to want to use tools that can potentially cause $100s of millions in potential damages (see Amazon store being down causing massive revenue loss).

I'm sure it's not _entirely_ built that way, and in practically speaking GitHub will almost certainly take it down rather than doing some kind of deep research about which code is which.

That's fine. File a false claim DMCA and that's felony perjury :) They know for a fact that there is no copyright on AI generated code, the courts have affirmed this repeatedly.

Try not to be overly confident about things where even the experts in the field (copyright lawyers) are uncertain of.

There's no major lawsuits about this yet, the general consensus is that even under current regulations it's in the grey. And even if you turn out to be right, and let's say 99% of this code is AI-generated, you're still breaking the law by using the other 1%, and good luck proving in court what parts of their code were human written and what weren't (especially when being sued by the company that literally has the LLM logs).

Which is why you should clone it right now

Popular, yes... but have you seen the issues? SOMETHING is going on in that repo: https://github.com/instructkr/claude-code/issues

Looks like mostly spam making fun of the code leak.

too much wechat QR Codes

which has already been deleted

I don't understand how you can have a 'clean-room port.' Seems contradictory to me.

That's not the actual plan.

"I have a popular repo, but the content will likely be removed and I won't have personally gained from the saga: how can I fix the part where I didn't profit?"

"Eureka! I'll remove the content preemptively, then come up with a backstory that justifies reusing the now empty repo for building the umpteenth coding harness! And I can even claim fuzzy ties to Claude Code!"

Hence the new description:

> The fastest repo in history to surpass 50K stars , reaching the milestone in just 2 hours after publication. Better Harness Tools, not merely storing the archive of leaked Claude Code but also make real things done. Now rewriting in Rust.

> The result is a clean-room Python rewrite that captures the architectural patterns of Claude Code's agent harness without copying any proprietary source.

This is what I'm referring to.

So am I.

That project you quoted is the one with that as its new description. Soon it'll just be [new thing] that happens to use the stars as social proof... in fact when I look again:

> The fastest repo in history to surpass 100K stars . Better Harness Tools that make real things done. Built in Rust using oh-my-codex.

They started a new project that justifies the same repo and scrapes a little credibility off of Claude Code. The intent is not an actual rewrite but to bolster what will be their own personal project trying to compete with OpenCode and co.

The grifter is already pasting references to WSJ articles about themselves in the Readme

What do stars mean in the context of random github accounts mirroring leaked source code?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com