That doesn’t apply here. Claude code is what leaked, not the models. Anthropic definitely owns Claude code copyright and can DMCA without it being contradictory
Its unclear whether there is sufficient human authorship in cc for copyright to stick on a court. Anthropics arguments would hinge on the curation of plans and the direction decisions, which haven't been properly tested as the source of authorship yet. Typically contracted implementers sign over copyright to the project owners, and this is where there is case law.
What if it's used for training data? It seems like there's no penalty for training on copyrighted materials.
But even that is vague and possibly not true. If they used LLM's to generate all of the code, then it may not fall under copyright, by the requirement of human authorship (which for code I think has not been tested yet in court) [1].
[1] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922