Changing a few words is thus enough to clear this case. What's the point of this exercise exactly?

Both products are so incredibly derivative and boring that I find it very, very hard to care about this "case".

If the UI was novel enough then there would be a software patent for it in this case. Anyway I’m not sure what your point is? Copyright is a dated concept and AI only reinforces that. Do you really believe the first one to prompt an AI in a specific way should be allowed to enforce exclusive ownership of the output? That’s insane.