Part of the difference like the other commenter mentioned is that Copilot isn't open source while basically everything except the final model is for the GPT mod

Part of the difference like the other commenter mentioned is that Copilot isn't open source while basically everything except the final model is for the GPT models. The other aspect of it is in application. GPT-3 isn't particularly aimed at using the generated output in works. Rather it exists more as an experiment than anything else. Where the works are used they are generally non-commercial, not used in the final product, or are transient and don't actually stick around (i.e. AI dungeon). This is compared to Copilot which, while in beta, is very much being marketed as a programming utility to help you write code. This comes with the implication that said code will be used in the final product. If GPT-3 was being used as a writing aid (not just brainstorming but actually writing), then I think we would be seeing a very different discussion around it. Another consideration (which I'm not sure how true it is but I'm inclined to believe) is that programming text tends to have a smaller resolution at which it becomes "unique" or can be matched against a source as a copyright infringement. I may be wrong about this and copilot may just be poorly trained or designed by comparison but it seems far harder to identify outright copied text from GPT-3 (that isn't quoted/attributed). I'm sure examples exist but from my experience with these text generation tools it seems far harder to get into copyright violation territory. --- Side note: If Copilot was working at an AST level rather than at a textual level I suspect it would have far less issues with copyright and would be more useful as a tool.