Well how else should it be taken? A thought, information, bytes are all semantically representing different shifting goalposts of what I was clearly not talking about. Copyright works that involve creation beyond a 'thought'. To derive it down to such is wrong and explicitly ignoring the point.
I mean this in a good way, but try not to miss the forest for the trees. Regardless of the process involved, the end result is (probably) either something digital or physical. And your message implies it's digital.
OP's message brings into focus that if it's something that can be easily copied, you're probably out of luck, regardless of whether you agree on the choice of words or not.
Because most of the time "digital" translates to "any people who wants to see it, literally needs to receive a copy". Hence the emphasis into your attempt to assert ownership over that copy that is already in possession of the other party, and the difficulty of trying to do that (which is what you want, if I interpreted your original post correctly).
So it still boils down to either copyright or patents, and whether you're able to enforce it with more effectiveness than companies that have more money than some countries' GDP.
EDIT: Also, check out stuff about first-sale doctrine[1] and how there's the possibility[2] of someone legally obtaining a digital license from you complying with your terms, but you not being able to enforce further restrictions on how they sell it afterwards (disclaimer, I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and I might be misreading these things).
My issue is putting my work on the free web is not a free license to vacuum it up. There is no consent.
The umbridge I have is there is no way currently to know whether OpenAI has used your, or anyone's content, and where from. This is the fundamental issue I have -- how do I find out?
