The claim is strongly supported by primary sources. The CoinDesk X post (fetched directly from the supplied link) explicitly reports Hoskinson criticizing Section 604 of the CLARITY Act and warning of perpetual liability for open-source developers. Hoskinson's own X post at @IOHK_Charles/status/2054372294714179941 is a direct primary source confirming his criticism. However, there is a nuance worth noting: the claim states Hoskinson argues that 'removing Section 604 would address liability concerns,' but the primary sources and the Bitcoin Magazine article suggest Section 604 (the BRCA provision) is actually intended to protect developers from liability. Hoskinson's criticism appears directed at efforts to weaken or remove Section 604's protections, or at a specific interpretation of Section 604 that imposes liability. The Traders Union article and web search snippets confirm that Hoskinson and others see Section 604 as the key battleground for open-source developer liability in the CLARITY Act. The core claim that Hoskinson criticizes Section 604 in the context of open-source developer liability in U.S. crypto legislation is confirmed with high confidence.