What does legal precedent have to do in an era of corrupt courts? Or, what if precedent was decided incorrectly initially? There are all kinds of ways whereby legal opinions shift over time. This isn't even analogous to the Bette case, where the song could be claimed to be "anchoring" one's perspective to the famous singer. So, I guess we'll see in the coming days. I'll have popcorn and this thread on speed dial.
If this goes to court (it almost certainly won't, OpenAI has enough money to 100x Johansson's net worth without blinking, unless she's principled enough to establish legal precedent) then we'd see on the order of years, not days.
