There're no prerequisites for fair use. I.e. licenses don't apply in such cases.
You could read more about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
P.S. I am not a lawyer.
That's true IF there's a case of fair use, which very often is not the case. The extremely common scenario where you include a photo on your blog or social media post that isn't yours, is virtually never fair use.
People often behave opposite to that, but that's a matter of lax enforcement. In general, you're not allowed to use a copyrighted image without permission, regardless of whether you attribute it or not.
Yep. There's a lot of case law, and there're a lot of details, so if your business relies on fair use, you need a very good lawyer (I am pretty sure the companies using AI for creative purposes have them).
P.S. I am not a lawyer
P.S. I am not a lawyer.
"Salvador Dali style painting" does not violate Dali's copyright any more than Dali violated the copyright of his surrealist influences.
It is like saying music made with guitar/bass/drums/vocals violates The Beatles copyright. No matter how remote, the influence of The Beatles is in the "training data" at this point with that configuration.
Stable Diffusion would have nothing on a band like Oasis violating The Beatles copyright if we want to go down this road of artist copyrighting a style. It is nonsense.