IANAL and I haven't dug deeply into the lawsuits, but my understanding is that using deliberate prompt engineering, they were able to get it to reproduce copyrighted material verbatim from its training set. That is obviously a problem, just as it would be if a human read the article and then reproduced part of it verbatim without attribution, but it's a very different argument than a blanket "everything AI generates is plagiarism"

Precisely. These headline repetitions as arguments do get tiring after a while.

humans can have original ideas, since they possess reasoning ability, whereas large language models cannot, since they have none

It doesn't? That's great! Why didn't you say so? And, of course, you have proof of that?

I'd suggest Chomsky for this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/08/opinion/noam-chomsky-chat...

of course there are others who disagree with him but they're wrong of course