You're repeating some talking points which are simply misinformation. An author who makes something "for hire", like an employed journalist, does not own the copyright. Do you believe that construction workers benefit when rents go up?

Copyrights are called intellectual property, because they work a lot like physical property. Employees create them and employers own them. They are bought and sold. A disproportionate share of property belongs to rich people, which is how they are rich.

This is about funneling more wealth to property owners. The idea that this would benefit anyone else is simply the good old trickle-down. It will not happen.

I think it's better be pragmatic then to give everything to the big corporations.

OpenAi isn't going to takes its tool offline so the loss of revenue isn't going away. Payments won't end up in the pockets of any individual journalist. The money the few journalistic sites will receive will be used to pay for the subscription fee to the next big model while cutting off their staff since it will net them more money.

If this goes through, Google and Microsoft will spend the next few years buying data or the companies that have it. The walls will be raised and we will be fucked, legislation will only help them.

And there is simply not enough public domain data to build a competitive product. Better to tax and redistribute through UBI while keeping the field competitive and avoiding monopolies imo.