Now GPT can reproduce copyrighted text, but only under some circumstances that are totally cheating so they don't count?
It's not a normal request your honour, pay no attention.
Not sure that line of argumentation is going to get you very far.
Particularly since those texts that are not precise verbatim copies of the copyrighted text that you do store appear to be derivative works of that copyrighted text.
And thus also fall under copyright.
Logically, I find myself on the side of the "humans aren't so special" side of this debate. We should encumber AIs with the same restrictions humans have when it comes to their "education". Sure you have to have a legal right to read/train on the material, but what you later produce is not necessarily a copyright violation.
If the LLM is straight up plagiarizing copyrighted material, then yes, the vendor should be responsible for damages.
Otherwise, if what we're trying to do is just sabotage these new-fangled digital looms because we don't want to compete with them, then well, I think there is a term for people that do that.