The title should be: "Top Execs Who Are Not Lawyers Thought Their Mass Book Piracy Was Bad Optics And Would Put Everybody, Not Just Authors, Out of Work; Legality Still TBD In The Court of Law But Allow Us To Litigate In The Court of Public Opinion” ;-)

If you look for actual evidence of AI replacing authors the evidence is thin. One study found no real impact, and another found authors using AI (not AI itself!) competing with other authors and applying downward pressure on sales through increased competition. I have seen no evidence yet of AI replacing authors directly, and this is probably their biggest challenge.

But these sound bites sure sound damning though!

I think courts will consider them, but I suspect it will weigh legal doctrines like Fair Use and actual economic studies more than these statements to determine infringement. These statements will likely matter more after a finding of infringement to show willfulness, and hence the damages calculation, if any. IANAL, so a real lawyer should keep me honest here.