Since the police of the City of London, which is a corporation controlling a district of London and is not London itself, are used to charge and penalize people the companies accuse of of violating their intellectual property rights.
I searched the comments for my own name, and while I didn't find any imposters for me, I did see several addresses repeated several times for others with my name. Except for George Foreman, it's unlikely that even one address would have several people with the same name in it sending support comments.
If I try to suppress all negative discussion about me by calling my critics Nazis, do I create a paradox?
Ernest & Julio Gallo was founded in 1933. E&B's logo declares they've been in business since 1873, and a quick search shows beer cans with the mark predating 1933. If E&J is claiming similarity, then E&B can reverse the charges and show that by E&J's argument, E&J are infringing on E&B. E&J's larger pockets would make lawyers salivate for the settlement they could get by applying E&J's argument back on them.
We don't know how the AI's memory is stored. We can dump how it's encoded, but neural nets don't encode reproducibly. The relationships between subjects are weighted and established depending on the AI's experience, and its pathways will be different from any other artificial or natural intelligence.
A reasonable person would know that a famous person with tattoos is going to be shown with them, either in photos or artwork. If the tattoo artist, who should have known that as part of his business, put the art on the celebrity's body without getting compensation for future portrayals, then he was authorizing the free distribution of those images in the celebrity's portrayals. He has given up his claim for control and compensation.