It's unclear to me that that is the case. If I prompt an image generation model specifically to generate an unlicensed picture of Batman, I do not suspect that a judge is going to be sympathetic to the argument that the t-shirt I was selling was made by DALL-E so I should be free of any copyright infringement claims against me.
Why would specifically prompting the LLM to generate similarly copyrighted code be any different? That's what's being discussed here - that people will "go the extra lengths" to intentionally copy your code.
The "It wasn't me, it was the tool, even though I directed the tool quite specifically to do the thing that happened" is not a new defense in the legal systems of the world. We are already generally are able to deal with these without significant issue.
Why would specifically prompting the LLM to generate similarly copyrighted code be any different? That's what's being discussed here - that people will "go the extra lengths" to intentionally copy your code.
The "It wasn't me, it was the tool, even though I directed the tool quite specifically to do the thing that happened" is not a new defense in the legal systems of the world. We are already generally are able to deal with these without significant issue.