The NYTimes case is a clear one because they are delivering nearly the same content as an end product to users. The others seem like dead ends. The infringer would be the prompter, not the AI which operates more like a search engine. This is Napster all over again, what a phenomenal waste of time and money, where the artist will definitely come out with 0 at the end of it and a few corporations control everything - not to mention, there's nothing stopping anyone from releasing a tool that will crawl all spongebobs, generate your model for you and allow you to produce locally copyright infringing material it to your hearts content locally. You could drown yourself in local spongebobs.