I think, as with most things, it’s slightly more legally ambiguous if the person you’re copying/whatever is rich enough to have good lawyers and a strong media presence.
You can argue about these morality of that, but I think it’s reasonably true, practically.
Especially given the very clear cut case here of the AI company deliberately cloning the voice of the most recognisable and human-like AI voice from fiction. And also tweeting that they’d done exactly that. And then lying that it was a coincidence. It wouldn’t stand up in court which is why they got rid of it – I’m sure that if Sam Altman and his counsel believed that they could beat ScarJo in court then we’d still be listening to “Sky”.
You can argue about these morality of that, but I think it’s reasonably true, practically.
Thus, it got taken down.