"It's the right thing to do" in reply to a moral query is the "begging the question fallacy".
The question at hand is of the form: Is it right to do X (to donate, in this case)? Your reply amounts to: yes, because X is the right thing to do. This merely restates the query as its own conclusion.
"Donations" are - by definition - entirely voluntary.
If people want to donate, that's fine. If they don't want to donate -- also fine. That's what "donation" means.
Therefore anyone's decision not to donate is entirely consistent with the author's own expressed preferences.
Whether an actor happens to be large and rich (OpenAI) is irrelevant. The license -- the author's formally expressed preferences -- does not say anything about "free unless you are rich." They could certainly have done so if they had wanted to. They didn't. You are taking it upon yourself to claim that you know what's best for them.
The question at hand is of the form: Is it right to do X (to donate, in this case)? Your reply amounts to: yes, because X is the right thing to do. This merely restates the query as its own conclusion.
"Donations" are - by definition - entirely voluntary.
If people want to donate, that's fine. If they don't want to donate -- also fine. That's what "donation" means.
Therefore anyone's decision not to donate is entirely consistent with the author's own expressed preferences.
Whether an actor happens to be large and rich (OpenAI) is irrelevant. The license -- the author's formally expressed preferences -- does not say anything about "free unless you are rich." They could certainly have done so if they had wanted to. They didn't. You are taking it upon yourself to claim that you know what's best for them.