Yes, but not every business works, and not every business model works, and not every business model works with every business, etc etc.

It's on the business to find a model that works within the environment of the free market and within the social framework.

If a business model only works by limiting competition, it's a bad model.

If it only works by limiting the rights of consumers, it's a bad model.

If it only works by blocking a legal activity (website crawling and scraping of publicly-facing data, for instance), it's a bad model.

And if their business can't operate otherwise, it's a bad business. No business has an intrinsic right to exist.

If a business model only works by copyright washing is it a bad model?

> No business has an intrinsic right to exist.

Do AI businesses have an intrinsic right to exist?

Absolutely don't, and I've argued since day 1 that by refusing to try to contract for training before they just ripped it, each and every one of them should be saddled with so much legal liability as to not exist. The capitalist overlords however, will grasp at anything that promises them of being free of dealing with labor...so... Here we are.

I think the question of is a business allowed to have something free only for humans (presumably with advertising) does not have a clear best answer - politicians can decide.

News has a business model: do actual journalism. I don't see much reason to fund the people who are giving me the same story as everyone else who received the same press release, with no additional details: I might as well subscribe to the press releases.

And people wonder why we’re all locked in a race to the bottom.