> Business doesn't operate on the benefit of society. It's not a charity.
Which is why we have legislation to force them to act in given ways. I'm not suggesting companies should choose to do it, I'm saying we should pass laws to force them.
> They have? No they haven't. There are already ongoing law suits.
That was in the context of the hypothetical where training models is just considered a type of copying and handled by existing copyright law. You seem to be misunderstanding my points as a cohesive argument about the current state of the world: I was describing possible ways to handle legislating around machine learning models.
> How do you? Send the NSA and FBI to everyone's house? How do you know I have a model?
> Just like stopping drugs? Good luck.
I answered this in the rest of my comment? I don't believe the comparison to drugs is at all reasonable: it's much easier to manage something large companies who have to operate in the commercial space do than something people do on the street corner.
It appears you aren't really engaging with what I'm saying, but giving knee-jerk responses, so I don't think this is going anywhere.
To leave the country? That's what would happen. They can develop elsewhere and "license" back to the US as needed or even leave the US market completely. The US no longer has a 10-200x GDP compared to the rest of the world it once did. This notion needs to stop and to see the world has changed.
Business doesn't operate on the benefit of society. It's not a charity.
> people have already given away copyright licenses, and their work will then be sold/used to train and they can't change that.
They have? No they haven't. There are already ongoing law suits.
> If we forced the models to be public domain
How do you? Send the NSA and FBI to everyone's house? How do you know I have a model?
> enforcing it isn't trivial but that doesn't mean it can't be done
Just like stopping drugs? Good luck.