The generated statements may be inaccurate but they cannot be called lies. To do would be a dangerous level of anthropomorphization in the legal sphere.
You don’t have to worry about the legal sphere anthropomorphising software. Software is legally not a person and therefore will not be treated as one by the courts, regardless of how people commonly refer to it.
We've long had precedent with search engines. But despite that, these cases are revisiting the way copyright might work.
These cases are not as simple as people like you imply no matter how many times you repeat the utterly pointless and irrelevant fact that computers are not humans.
This is a lawyer writing about a lawsuit on a law office blog. That's what's worrisome.
LLMs have no sense for what is correct or not, therefor it cannot tell the truth or lie. It always hallucinates - sometimes those hallucinations match our factual understanding.
Generally when people remember wrong it's considered a mistake, not a lie. Lies imply an intent to deceive.
"Fabrication" is a much more accurate and neutral word. I wish "hallucination" hadn't taken hold.