With Uber, no one's suing individual riders or drivers over an illegal taxi ride.
observationally they’re in an interesting position, balancing their artistic clients and their executive clients. a clean model is the easiest way to hedge their portfolio and reputation.
The courts could find that it isn't possible to sign away these rights. There are many other rights that the law does not permit to be signed away for much more tame reasons than "enables further creations of 'your' work (or in the case of actors, literally 'you') not only without your actual involvement, but even long after your death". I would expect that it at least comes with a time limit. "Artists can sign a license to use these rights but only until their death + 10 years, after that the licensee can't use anything trained on their work. Artists also have an unrevokable right to cancel the license at any time with 90 day notice." might be one possible outcome.
Content licensing is really well established and already allows for licensing for specific use and different royalty structures based on usage. An example of this is streaming vs theater vs syndication.
So, now there is a new venue to take into account and have the lawyers add a few pages to their contracts moving forward.
This is exactly my point. An AI that can replace you, personally, is closer to signing away your identity or freedom than the rights to display a specific already completed work.
*you paid for it.