Google does do this though. Just Google for an easy to answer question, like “when was George Washington born”
The same applies to all realistic use-cases for copilot by the way. Whatever is produces is not copyrightable.
Correct.
>The same applies to all realistic use-cases for copilot by the way. Whatever is produces is not copyrightable.
That's a pretty bold statement to make. How do you know how people use copilot? Also IIRC Oracle vs Google essentially determined 3 lines of code can be copyrightable. So I think you statement fails on two points, you can't really predict how people use copilot and you cannot predict what a court would decide is copyrightable (this is much less straight forward than statement of facts).
Alarm bells of this magnitude haven't been rung about people torrenting films for decades; it's a given that some people are just going to do it and there's little that can be done to stop it.
Producing new data from original data of questionable lineage makes the questionable acts visible. Copilot and the like actively encourage this creation.
If it were possible to peek into the rooms of everyone who downloaded a torrent to admonish them then maybe pirating would have been made a modicum more taboo. But those consumers never intended to leave their rooms. Copilot forces them to leave their rooms if they want their derivative work to be used.
Google Search is ethically acceptable because for the most part website creators like being in search results and are "compensated" in the form of more visitors, and if they don't like it they can easily exclude themselves. Website creators famously do NOT like it when Google indexes their content and then serves it up independently.