Anthropic Just Killed Clawdbot: The 10-Second Chaos That Followed

Yesterday, Clawdbot was the hottest AI project on GitHub. 34,700 stars. Viral enough to spark a run on Mac Minis. Driving real revenue to Anthropic through Claude API usage.

Today it's called Moltbot, and the creator is very clear about what happened: "I was forced to rename the account by Anthropic. Wasn't my decision."

Here's the thing. Clawdbot wasn't competing with Anthropic. It was a customer. Every user paid for Claude API access. The project was essentially free marketing, driving Claude adoption among developers who'd never otherwise touch the API.

Then Anthropic's trademark lawyers showed up.

And it gets weirder.

The Three-Day Timeline That Changed Everything

January 24, 2026: Peter Steinberger appears on the "Insecure Agents" podcast. Someone asks about the name. He says: "I looked it up. There's no trademark for this."

He was confident. He'd done the research.

January 27, 2026: Anthropic issues a formal trademark request. "Clawd" is too similar to "Claude," they say. Steinberger gets hit with the demand to rename.

When someone asks if he could at least use "Clawbot" (dropping the 'd'), his answer is simple: "Not allowed to."

10 seconds later: Crypto scammers grab both the old GitHub organisation name and the X/Twitter handle during the transition.

I had to read that twice. Ten seconds.

Within hours: A fraudulent $CLAWD token launches. It hits a $16 million market cap before collapsing. Steinberger's forced to publicly disavow it.

January 28, 2026: The project's fully transitioned to Moltbot. Zero technical changes. But the developer community is talking.

What Actually Changed (Spoiler: Almost Nothing)

The name. That's it.

• Old: Clawdbot, clawd.bot, github.com/clawdbot
• New: Moltbot, molt.bot, github.com/moltbot
• Functionality: Identical
• Features: Unchanged
• Command: The legacy clawdbot command still works for backward compatibility

If you're using it, you don't need to do anything except know it's got a new name now.

For complete technical analysis and business assessment of what Moltbot (formerly Clawdbot) actually does, including cost analysis, security considerations, and deployment recommendations for Australian businesses:

Related Article9 min read

The $600 Mac Mini That Runs Your Business 24/7: Inside the CLAWD Phenomenon

Mac Minis are reportedly selling out for CLAWD. We investigated if Australian businesses should care, and whether you actually need that $600...

Read full article

The Irony Nobody's Missing

Let me spell this out.

Clawdbot was driving paying customers to Anthropic. Every developer who spun up the agent configured it to use Claude as the AI brain. They paid for API access. They built plugins, wrote tutorials, created documentation. All promoting Claude.

The project made Anthropic money.

And Anthropic killed it anyway.

This isn't a competing product. This isn't brand dilution. This is a customer with 34,700 GitHub stars sending revenue upstream, and getting a trademark enforcement notice for their trouble.

Compare that to how OpenAI handles similar projects. Or how most tech companies treat open-source developers building on their platforms. There's typically a "we'll look the other way if you're helping us" understanding.

Not here.

The 10-Second Heist Nobody Expected

During the GitHub and Twitter account rename process, there's a brief window where the old handles become available. Steinberger knew this. He tried to manage it carefully.

It didn't matter.

Scammers grabbed both accounts in roughly 10 seconds. They launched a fake $CLAWD token with fraudulent endorsements. The token speculation pushed it to a $16 million market cap before reality set in and it collapsed (Dev.to, January 2026).

Steinberger had to publicly distance himself from his own project name.

This is what happens when you force high-profile projects through rapid transitions. Someone's always watching. Someone's always ready to exploit the chaos.

The Broader Question: Where's the Line?

Look, trademark protection is legitimate. If you don't enforce your trademarks, you risk losing them. That's law, not opinion.

And "Clawd" versus "Claude"? Phonetically nearly identical. Same industry. Same audience. I get why Anthropic's lawyers flagged it.

But here's the broader debate happening in developer communities right now.

Anthropic's Presumed Position:

• Standard corporate IP enforcement
• Preventing brand dilution and consumer confusion
• Protecting the "Claude" trademark portfolio
• Following legal requirements to actively defend marks

Developer Community's Position:

• Project was helping Anthropic, not hurting it
• Enforcement timing feels arbitrary (viral for weeks before action)
• This creates fear about building on Anthropic's platform
• Contrast with more permissive approaches from competitors

The unanswered question? Why enforce now? The project was viral for weeks. Anthropic had to have known about it. Why wait until it hit peak momentum?

We asked Anthropic for comment. They declined.

Related Article10 min read

Anthropic Just Blocked Claude Code Subscriptions Outside Its Own App

Claude Code OAuth tokens now fail in OpenCode and other third-party tools. An apparently unannounced policy change just rewired the AI coding...

Read full article

What This Means for Australian Businesses

If you're running Clawdbot (sorry, Moltbot) in your business, nothing changes technically. The agent works exactly the same. Your workflows are fine.

But there's a broader lesson here about building on Big AI platforms.

The technology layer is increasingly controlled by a handful of companies. Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Microsoft. They set the terms. They enforce the boundaries. They can change the rules mid-game if their lawyers decide something's too close to their trademarks.

That's not good or bad. It's just the reality.

If you're building business-critical systems on AI APIs, you need to understand you're building on someone else's infrastructure. They can pull access. They can enforce trademark restrictions. They can change pricing. They can ban your industry entirely.

Diversification isn't paranoia anymore. It's operational risk management.

Related Article11 min read

The Ralph Wiggum Technique: Ship Code While You Sleep

A developer left Claude Code running for three months. It built a working compiler. Here's the absurdly simple technique that's changing how...

Read full article

The Bottom Line

Clawdbot is now Moltbot. The rename won't slow adoption. Developers understand what happened. They'll keep using it because it's genuinely useful.

But this sets precedent. Big AI companies are drawing harder boundaries around their brand ecosystems. Open-source projects building on commercial AI platforms now know that viral success can trigger trademark enforcement, regardless of whether you're helping or hurting the parent company.

Steinberger handled the transition professionally. He complied immediately. He warned users about scams. He maintained backward compatibility with the old command name.

And he was very clear about what happened: he was forced.

The internet doesn't forget that part.

---