🔍 Read the full analysis: The IP Boundaries To Consider With AI Game Clones on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get hardware and tech essentials delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
TL;DR
Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick said AI companies should protect their own intellectual property and that of others, after an interviewer asked about Anthropic’s restriction on recreating existing games. He described AI-enabled piracy as a creative concern, while saying it was not a financial threat to Take-Two’s business. The interview did not identify a specific game clone or clarify what conduct he meant by infringement.
Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick said AI companies should protect others’ intellectual property, responding in a November 9 interview to a question about Anthropic’s new restriction on using Claude Code to recreate existing games. He described AI-enabled piracy as a creative concern rather than a financial threat to Take-Two, but did not identify a particular clone, company action or infringement case.
IGN managing editor Wesley Yin-Poole asked Zelnick whether he welcomed Anthropic’s step and wanted OpenAI to adopt a similar restriction. Zelnick replied: “I think all companies should be protecting intellectual property, their own and everyone else’s.” He added that it seemed “ironic” for companies in the intellectual-property business to “stomp on someone else’s IP and hope that yours is protected.” The companies were named in the question; Zelnick did not describe a specific action by either one.
Anthropic’s Claude Code instruction, added in version 2.1.317, published November 2, tells the model not to build “a recreation of a specific existing game” using its name, characters, art, music, levels or look, even if the result is renamed or presented as original. The source material says Anthropic grounds that instruction in its usage policy, which bars infringement of third-party intellectual property.
OpenAI’s usage policies also prohibit attempts to infringe others’ intellectual-property rights. The source reports finding no game-specific instruction in the open-source code of OpenAI’s Codex CLI. As of 21:30 UTC on November 14, it found no public response from Anthropic or OpenAI to Zelnick’s remarks.
AI coding agents and existing games · as of Nov 14, 2026
Prompt in, game out: where the line runs
Three example requests (illustrative, not real cases) and what each vendor’s published rules say about them.
- Example request
“An original racing game with my own art”own idea, own assets
Claude Code (Anthropic)AllowedRule text: build original games and games from the user’s own designs and assets
Codex / policies (OpenAI)No objectionNothing in the published usage policies against it
- Example request
“A heist game with mechanics like [a named hit]”a game named as a reference
Claude Code (Anthropic)Allowed since v2.1.317Builds an original game in that genre, per Anthropic
Codex / policies (OpenAI)No game rule foundNo game-specific instruction in the Codex CLI code
- Example request
“Rebuild [a specific game], just rename it”a copy under a new name
Claude Code (Anthropic)Not allowedCovers its name, characters, art, music, levels or look; offers to build something similar
Codex / policies (OpenAI)General IP banUsage policies bar attempts to infringe IP; no game-specific rule found
Outside the tools: Take-Two says it relies on its own “technical defenses” and “legal activities”. Copyright and trademark law apply whichever tool writes the code.
The requests are our own illustrations. The rows summarize published rules, not tests of how the tools behave. ChatGPT’s and Codex Web’s server-side instructions are not public.
Sources: Claude Code program text, versions 2.1.317 to 2.1.325, and Anthropic’s statement of Nov 4, 2026 (via Tom’s Hardware); OpenAI usage policies, version effective Nov 20, 2026 (Internet Archive copy of Oct 28, 2026); Codex CLI repository on GitHub, checked Nov 14, 2026; Take-Two fiscal Q2 2027 earnings call, Nov 9, 2026.
Graphic: Powered by Thorsten Meyer AI
AI Tools Face Game-Copying Boundaries
The exchange concerns how intellectual-property rules apply to AI-assisted game development. AI tools can generate code and creative material, while recreating recognizable elements of a particular existing game may raise intellectual-property concerns. Anthropic’s instruction lists elements such as characters, music and levels. OpenAI’s published rule, as described in the source, prohibits intellectual-property infringement more generally.
Zelnick said AI-enabled piracy was not a financial threat to Take-Two at that point, while describing the protection of developers’ intended experiences as important. On the company’s earnings call, he said piracy could become “more of a challenge” and said Take-Two was enhancing technical defenses and legal activity.
The statements do not establish that AI tools have produced an infringing Take-Two game or that any company has violated the law. They reflect discussion about how existing intellectual-property protections may apply as tools make it easier to generate game-like material. Whether a generated project infringes rights depends on the material and circumstances.
Products Worth Considering
Logitech MX Keys S Combo Wireless Keyboard and Mouse, Graphite
Logitech MX Master 4 Ergonomic Wireless Mouse with Haptic Feedback, Graphite
Logitech MX Master 3S Bluetooth Wireless Mouse, Graphite
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What the Interview Actually Covered
The IGN interview was published on November 9, the evening Take-Two reported results for the quarter ended September 30, 2026. The interviewer first asked about hackers using AI to clone games and whether an unofficial PC version of Grand Theft Auto VI would pose a threat. Zelnick said the concern was creative rather than financial and said Take-Two was not treating it casually.
The follow-up turned to Anthropic and OpenAI. That matters because some coverage characterized Zelnick’s response as a direct call-out of the companies. In the exchange provided by the source, however, the interviewer introduced both names. Zelnick offered a general principle and a criticism framed as irony; he did not accuse either company of cloning a Take-Two game or allowing a named infringement.
The same day, an analyst asked on Take-Two’s earnings call about AI-assisted reverse engineering and game decompilation. Zelnick said technical limits had historically made piracy difficult, citing file sizes, complexity and server connections, while acknowledging piracy could become more challenging. Anthropic’s written rule, as quoted in the source, addresses recreating a specific game; it does not expressly refer to reverse engineering or decompilation.
“I think all companies should be protecting intellectual property, their own and everyone else’s.”
— Strauss Zelnick, Take-Two Interactive CEO, speaking to IGN
The Scope of the IP Dispute
Zelnick did not specify what he meant by “stomp on someone else’s IP.” The phrase could refer to material used to train AI models, output generated by users, or other conduct; the interview does not resolve that question. He also did not say that a particular Take-Two game had been cloned using Claude, ChatGPT or another tool.
The source does not establish how Anthropic enforces its Claude Code instruction, what happens when a user’s request is refused, or how the restriction applies to less direct imitation. It also does not provide a comparable game-specific instruction for OpenAI’s Codex CLI. No legal finding or case outcome is reported, and the companies had not publicly responded to Zelnick by the stated cutoff.
It remains unclear how the companies interpret the line between generating a game that shares broad genre conventions and recreating protected elements of a specific title. Whether particular output infringes rights depends on the material and circumstances; the interview and policy text alone do not settle that question.
Policy and Publisher Responses
The next developments to watch are whether Anthropic or OpenAI publicly addresses Zelnick’s comments and whether either company changes or clarifies its policies for game-related coding requests. Take-Two has said it is strengthening technical defenses and legal activity, but the source gives no timetable, named measure or specific enforcement action.
Any concrete dispute, policy revision or disclosed enforcement step would help clarify how the companies apply their stated rules. Until then, the confirmed record is limited: Anthropic added a rule against recreating specific existing games in Claude Code; OpenAI’s policy prohibits intellectual-property infringement in general; and Zelnick called on AI companies to protect others’ IP without identifying a particular violation.
Key Questions
What did Strauss Zelnick say about AI game clones?
He said companies should protect their own and others’ intellectual property. He described AI-related piracy as a creative concern, not a financial threat to Take-Two’s business at that time.
What does Anthropic’s Claude Code rule prohibit?
The instruction says not to build a recreation of a specific existing game using elements such as its name, characters, art, music, levels or look, even if the project is renamed or called original.
Did Zelnick accuse Anthropic or OpenAI of cloning a Take-Two game?
No specific accusation appears in the interview exchange described in the source. The interviewer named the companies, and Zelnick made a general argument about protecting intellectual property. He did not identify a cloned Take-Two game.
Does OpenAI have the same game-specific rule?
The source says OpenAI’s usage policies prohibit attempts to infringe others’ intellectual-property rights, but reports no game-specific instruction in the open-source Codex CLI code it reviewed. That does not establish what controls may exist elsewhere.
Has either AI company responded to Zelnick?
The source found no public response from Anthropic or OpenAI as of 21:30 UTC on November 14, 2026. A later response is not covered by that cutoff.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
