yes, as @selestify also noted, that seems contradictory on the surface but actually isn't. the virus itself is a reduction of entropy while it's net existential entropy contribution is positive.

where you draw the system boundary matters for defining entropy changes, but long-term we're all bound to increase entropy, otherwise life (and our semi-living cousins) would be violating the laws of thermodynamics writ large.

When you simply include the raw materials the virus is made from before and after it forms you have a net loss of entropy. So, it’s not clear what you mean by boundaries in that case.

I disagree with life increasing entropy; it does do that but it expels the entropy.

Living things are low-entropy internally, but produce higher entropy externally than would have been without life.

Hmm, I don’t follow the comparison. How could, for instance, the sun use “life” to generate more entropy than it already does?

To some degree depending on how productive they are externally, eg bee vs fox.