> In that specific case, no. Fair use laws cover that, and Google vs author guild had solved that specific case in court. Using your work falls under fair use, just like human reading your work and incorporating ideas in his/her own work.

That's completely false. The Google case was found to be fair use, precisely because it did not "dilute the market for writing". That's one of the four legal tests for fair use. The judge said that it did not produce anything that competed economicially in the market for the books that it scanned; on the contrary it might increase their sales. Whether such scanning is fair use, is determined on a case-by-case basis. If AIs are being used to produce "new" works that are sold commercially and undercut the authors of the originals that it's based on, it will be much more difficult to prove fair use.

Furthermore, the Copilot product creates a loophole where businesses can incorporate code released under e.g. a GPL license that requires said business to release its deriviative works under the same open-source license, and make it closed-source instead. That can also create an unfair economic advantage in the market. These questions are far from "solved".