The core question eventually put before a jury would be if it was unintentionally similar or an imitation and attempting to pay her for use of her voice is clear evidence they wanted it because of it or they perceived the voices where overly similar. Either of those are possible, but to then use the voice anyway became problematic.

I’m not saying Sky did anything wrong. But the final result is close enough many people assumed it was Scarlet without promoting, that’s problematic when they are making references to her role as an AI voice and obviously wanted to make a deal.

And of course, some specific aspects of the case are unique. Universal used a face mold they had made of Glover's face, for instance.

I’ll give you the mold makes the intent more clear, but I doubt the jury is going to be debating intent. Pulling the voice suggests OpenAI thinks this is either a real risk or bad publicity.