Whatever harm you see coming from OpenAI is not going away if the NYT wins. All a NYT win would mean, is that owners of intellectual property get money without having to do work.

I don’t think that we are entirely on the same page for the impact of the precedent. If the ruling is not comically constrained, it would layout the path forward for other creators and IP owners. The vast majority of which are individuals which are those most harmed.

Honestly, the best possible (though unlikely in the current political climate) outcome would be an overhaul of IP laws to make them in any way sane and legally codify mechanisms to protect workers from career loss due to automation such as taxes on AI and automation tools that replace humans in order to fund re-skilling programs as well as, ideally, publicly-funded organizations to pay cultural workers and remove the possibility of the extinction of the working artist, like is done with Ireland’s Art Council progams (I say this as one who works primarily in automation). Without such outcomes or a narrow ruling, yeah, it would effectively be just lead to NYT getting more money.

ETA: While we don’t currently seem to be on the same page, I do want to say thank you for the civil conversation and good points, and my apologies for my ADHD habit of getting a bit verbose.