I'm not the author of this project, but in my understanding, it's the same as if you were to write the code yourself. The project doesn't publish anything and it works entirely locally aside from LLM calls (which could in the future be 100% local as well). So you remain the author and have complete control over the license of the generated code.
If I run an OCR software 100% locally, do I get the copyright on the scanned result of Harry Potter?
Don't understand: using a giant LLM locally negates all the copyrights contained in the LLM? In which country is that a law?
The license is the one of the original, since this is unambiguously a derivative work.
So not entirely locally. Yes these could eventually also run locally but OP’s point still stands.
If it runs 100% locally then yes, it would be safe to use.
openai's official stance is that it will never use API calls as training data, and that in my understanding it may retain API call data for up to 30 days for compliance purposes, but that it legally won't store it beyond that (whereas chatgpt convos are meant to be stored and used for training purposes).
as a next step, they could provide a swappable version of the LLM provider using something like https://github.com/imartinez/privateGPT, https://github.com/alexanderatallah/window.ai, etc. would love to have a standard develop here as the community matures around LLM usage
I find this reasoning a bit flimsy. Copyright doesn't have anything to do with publishing, and is it really that clear that you are the sole author of the derived work?