In the burgeoning market of "agentic" coding tools, OpenAI's Codex CLI is gaining favor among developers, thanks to its open-source approach and collaborative spirit. This stands in stark contrast to Anthropic's Claude Code, which has sparked controversy with its restrictive licensing and takedown notices.

Claude Code and Codex CLI are rival tools that enable developers to tap into the power of AI models running in the cloud to complete various coding tasks. Both tools were released within months of each other, as Anthropic and OpenAI race to capture valuable developer mindshare. However, their approaches to licensing and community engagement couldn't be more different.

OpenAI's Codex CLI is available under an Apache 2.0 license, which allows for distribution and commercial use. This permissive license has encouraged developers to contribute to the tool's codebase, with dozens of suggestions merged in just a week. In contrast, Claude Code is tied to Anthropic's commercial license, limiting how it can be modified without explicit permission from the company.

Anthropic's decision to "obfuscate" the source code for Claude Code has also raised eyebrows. When a developer de-obfuscated the code and released it on GitHub, Anthropic filed a DMCA complaint, requesting the code's removal. This move has been met with criticism from developers on social media, who see it as a restrictive and heavy-handed approach.

In contrast, OpenAI has been praised for its openness and willingness to engage with the developer community. The company has merged suggestions into Codex CLI's codebase, including one that allows the tool to tap into AI models from rival providers – including Anthropic. This move has been seen as a significant PR win for OpenAI, which has historically been associated with proprietary and locked-down products.

Anthropic's decision to issue takedown notices and restrict access to Claude Code's source code may be driven by security concerns or other factors. However, the company's silence on the matter has only fueled speculation and criticism. It remains to be seen whether Anthropic will reconsider its approach and release the source code under a permissive license in the future.

The contrast between OpenAI's and Anthropic's approaches may signal a broader shift in the AI industry's approach to open source. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has acknowledged that the company has been on the "wrong side of history" when it comes to open source, and this move may be a sign of a new direction. As the battle for developer mindshare continues, it will be interesting to see how these two companies adapt and evolve their strategies.

Ultimately, the outcome of this rivalry will depend on which approach resonates with developers. Will OpenAI's open-source approach and collaborative spirit win out, or will Anthropic's more restrictive licensing and takedown notices ultimately prevail? Only time will tell, but one thing is clear: the stakes are high, and the future of AI-powered coding tools hangs in the balance.