As always with this type of headline, the answer is
No
> The alleged wrongdoing comes down to what Butterick summarized to me as “the three ‘C’s”: The artists had not consented to have their copyrighted artwork included in the laion database; they were not compensated for their involvement, even as companies including Midjourney charged for the use of their tools; and their influence was not credited when A.I. images were produced using their work
It's a list of links to publically available content. The metadata is the alt-text of the linked images.
No one has the ability to demand they not be linked to, because otherwise the simple solution is "stop hosting" or "add authentication" and the ramifications of any other conclusion break the internet (EU right-to-forget would apply, but that compels action after a request, it doesn't imply linking is illegal).
Same for this scraping algorithms, somebody has written them.
I don’t have a solution, it’s only a consideration.
Why? This is no different than software in general using third-party assets without permission. We, as in both society and the legal world, know how to deal with license violators and IP thieves.
The only question is whether we can stop confounding the discussion from spamming "AI" every-fucking-where every-fucking-time.