I want privacy, but the original question is irrelevant in response to an article about a situation in which it did not exist - OpenAI is providing a product that has surveillance baked into it, obvious by virtue of this article’s existence. They chose to actively make themselves aware of people using their service in a ways they deemed to be a problem in some way. This is likely one of many that they came into possession of information suggesting real life harm was imminent by one of their users, which incurred a responsibility, in my opinion, morally, and, I’m guessing, legally. They absconded from that responsibility.
Your questions are interesting, and you and me have likely arrived at similar answers to them, however they’re fully irrelevant to this specific situation in which they’ve already been answered within its context.
I’d hope you’re right, but would the FAA be concerned with something hint 310’ tall? Seems low for aircraft, but I don’t know where the FAA’s domain starts and stops.