I am a firm believer in open source, with the caveat that authors should always and everywhere have ultimate say over how to release their own work, never legislators or courts. FOSS may be the morally and technically preferable choice for many projects but is not inherently superior, and there are several advantages to going proprietary - plenty of examples where paid software is actually higher quality, regardless of whether it is developed in the open. This is also likely to be the case with ML software. If you want nice things then pay for them, but ultimately authors should be able to retain full creative freedom and executive control over their own software and let the marketplace decide.
How would you access the source code of an encrypted program after copyright expiration if the author is dead and gives no one the keys? You might be thinking of public domain?
Nope. I support open source and personally release all my work in the open, but also support authors' freedom to distribute their own work however they wish and users' freedom to choose between them. These are fully consistent views.
