Elon Musk Rages Against Anthropic

Elon Musk’s loudest AI feud is no longer centered on OpenAI alone. The public target that keeps catching his fire is Anthropic, the Claude maker whose developer tool, Claude Code, has gone from niche advantage to headline-grabbing momentum in a matter of months.

Musk’s pattern is familiar: pick a rival, frame the contest as a moral emergency, and try to drag the debate onto terrain where he feels he has leverage. What is new is the intensity and timing. In mid-to-late February 2026, as Anthropic’s fundraising and product traction became harder to shrug off, Musk’s posts increasingly read less like casual sniping and more like someone trying to stop a narrative from settling in.

Thanks to growing demand, lithium stock prices grew 2X+ from June 2025 to January 2026. $ALB climbed as high as 227%. $LAC hit 151%. $SQM, 159%.

But the real winner may be a stock not listed on public exchanges, EnergyX.

This $1B unicorn’s patented technology can recover 3X more lithium than traditional methods. That’s earned investment from leaders like General Motors.

Now they’re preparing for commercial production just as experts project 5X demand growth by 2040. They’ve announced what could be one of the US’ largest lithium production facilities and have rights to approximately 150,000 lithium-rich acres across North and South America.

Unlike public stocks, you can buy private EnergyX shares alongside 40,000+ other investors. Invest for $11/share by the 2/26 deadline.

Invest in EnergyX Today

_{This is a paid advertisement for EnergyX Regulation A offering. Please read the offering circular at invest.energyx.com. Under Regulation A, a company may change its share price by up to 20% without requalifying the offering with the Securities and Exchange Commission.}

For a long stretch, Musk’s AI storyline had a primary villain: OpenAI. He sued OpenAI in March 2024, arguing it had abandoned its original mission and become too aligned with Microsoft’s commercial interests. Whatever one thinks of the merits, the move cemented the idea that Musk’s main public battleground was the company he once helped start.

That context matters because it makes the recent shift in his rhetorical energy easier to spot. In February 2026, Musk’s sharpest language was repeatedly deployed not at Sam Altman or OpenAI’s leadership, but at Anthropic and Claude. In the span of days, he jumped from commentary to accusation, and from accusation to an almost obsessive posture of rebuttal and counter-attack whenever Anthropic appeared in the news cycle.

This does not mean Musk stopped criticizing OpenAI. It means the emotional center of gravity moved. When a rival becomes the one you cannot stop addressing, you are implicitly conceding where the pressure point is. And in Musk’s case, the pressure point increasingly looked like the company building the coding tool that developers actually want to live inside.

Claude Code is not just another chatbot feature. It is a coding agent positioned as workflow infrastructure, and those products have a way of becoming sticky, then unavoidable. Reuters reported that Claude Code reached an annualized revenue run rate of $1 billion after launching earlier in 2025, and that it was adopted by large enterprises including Netflix, Spotify, and Salesforce.

Anthropic itself has pushed the “breakout” framing even harder. In its announcement about acquiring Bun, Anthropic said Claude Code hit $1 billion in run-rate revenue just six months after becoming publicly available, and presented the Bun acquisition as a way to accelerate performance and scale.

Then came the money signal, the one that turns product momentum into existential threat in Silicon Valley: valuation. The Associated Press reported that Anthropic said it raised $30 billion in a round led by GIC and Coatue, putting the company at a $380 billion valuation. That number did not just place Anthropic among the biggest private AI labs. It put it in the tier where rivals cannot pretend you are “not in the game.”

The mix is combustible: a developer-first product with visible adoption, plus a war chest and a valuation that communicates inevitability. If you are Musk, trying to position xAI and Grok as the alternative path, this is the kind of competitor that can “take the game” without asking permission.

Musk’s February broadside came in response to Anthropic’s fundraising announcement, and it was framed as a moral indictment. Fox Business reported that Musk slammed Anthropic, calling its AI “misanthropic and evil” and alleging demographic bias in Claude. The phrasing mattered because it matched Musk’s broader habit of turning model behavior into a political and ethical cudgel, not just a product critique.

A second flare-up landed almost immediately on the next big AI controversy: distillation and “model theft.” On Monday, Feb. 23, 2026, Anthropic accused three Chinese AI firms, DeepSeek, MiniMax, and Moonshot AI, of “industrial-scale” distillation. Business Insider reported Anthropic’s claim that roughly 24,000 fraudulent accounts generated more than 16 million interactions with Claude to extract capabilities. The Guardian, citing AFP, summarized the same accusation and framed it as part of an escalating U.S.-China AI race.

Musk’s response was not to defend Anthropic’s IP. He attacked Anthropic’s legitimacy. In a post on X, he claimed Anthropic was “guilty of stealing training data at massive scale” and had paid “multi-billion dollar settlements” for it.

Here is where the rhetoric collides with the record. Anthropic has, in fact, been at the center of landmark copyright litigation. Reuters reported that Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class action brought by authors alleging the company used pirated books to train its models, and the AP reported preliminary approval of that $1.5 billion settlement by a federal judge. Musk’s “multi-billion” language is his spin, but the underlying reality is that a billion-dollar settlement exists and is now part of the public backdrop in any training-data dispute.

And the data story is messy in ways that fuel exactly this kind of mud fight. The Washington Post reported on “Project Panama,” describing unsealed legal filings that revealed Anthropic’s effort to acquire, destructively scan, and then recycle millions of books to build training data. Meanwhile, Reuters has also reported on the legal landscape itself, including rulings that have treated some AI training practices as fair use while drawing sharper lines around piracy. In other words, Musk is weaponizing a controversy that is real, even if his framing is maximalist.

It is tempting to read Musk’s outbursts as pure personality, but the timing suggests competitive anxiety, too. Musk’s own AI company, xAI, is directly positioned against Claude, and Fox Business explicitly framed Grok and Claude as direct competitors in the chatbot market.

At the same time, xAI has been dealing with turbulence that makes a public obsession with rivals look less like confidence and more like deflection. Reuters reported in February 2026 that two xAI co-founders, Tony Wu and Jimmy Ba, stepped down as part of a broader exodus from the firm, and The Verge reported on a wave of departures and internal tensions as the company reorganized. When your house is mid-restructure, it is easier to point at a neighbor’s alleged hypocrisy than to explain why the best people keep leaving your own lab.

There is also the reputational squeeze from product controversy. Reuters reported that governments and regulators have scrutinized Grok for sexually explicit content and demanded safeguards. That kind of pressure narrows a company’s room to maneuver, and it raises the stakes for any narrative that says your rival is both safer and better at the one thing the market will pay for right now: shipping useful agents.

So when Musk “rage tweets” about Anthropic, it can be read as more than a tantrum. It is a bid to reframe the competitive landscape in moral terms, because moral terms are where he believes he can drag a rival down to his level, or lower.

Strip away the insults and the data-war posturing, and the strategic threat is straightforward: whoever becomes the default interface for software creation gets compounding advantage. That is why coding agents matter so much, and why Claude Code’s adoption reads like a turning point. It is also why partnerships and distribution channels loom large. In May 2025, Reuters reported Microsoft would add an Anthropic coding agent to GitHub, signaling that Anthropic’s tooling ambitions were not confined to its own app.

Add Anthropic’s $380 billion valuation and $30 billion funding round to that distribution story, and the outline of Musk’s panic becomes easier to understand. Big money does not just buy GPUs. It buys time, hiring leverage, and the ability to turn a popular tool into an ecosystem.

This is why the sudden focus on Anthropic is revealing. Musk can sue OpenAI, meme it, and re-litigate a founding narrative from 2015. But a rival that is gaining developer mindshare right now, with a product that plugs into real workflows, is a different kind of problem. It is the kind of problem that does not wait for court dates, and it does not care who won the last argument on X.