That’s not a legal statement. It never went to court, we don’t know how it would have faired under Fair Use. Likewise, none of the other legal questions from the other suits ended up being decided by a judge.
But perhaps it was a poor example, because Warhol’s work draws directly from the source material. It wasn’t really the main point of my post above.
Again, an NFT is a reference to a work, like a url, where the only possible thing of value is the provenance of the NFT itself. An artist’s own NFT may or may not have any value, but my version of an NFT, or Joe Schmoe’s or a million other potential copies of NFTs have no value at all, unless, somehow, my creation of the NFT is itself seen as a work of art. (e.g. if Shia LaBeouf made an NFT of the source of one of his many plagiarized apologies.)