It's a bit different - here most of the value lies in the weights.
A better analogy would be some graphics card drivers which ship a massive proprietary GPU firmware blob, and a small(ish) kernel shim to talk with said blob.
Well perhaps we can consider this a kind of short-sightedness of Stallmann. His point with GPL and the free software movement, as I understand it, was to ensure the user could continue to use the software regardless of what the software author decided to do.
Sometimes though the software alone can be near useless without additional assets that aren't necessarily covered by the code license.
Like Quake, having the engine without the assets is useless if what you wanted was to play Quake the game. Neural nets are another prime example, as you mention. Simulators that rely on measured material property databases for usable results also fall into this category, and so on.
So perhaps what we need is new open source licenses that includes the assets needed for the user to be able to reasonably use the program as a whole.
Sometimes though the software alone can be near useless without additional assets that aren't necessarily covered by the code license.
Like Quake, having the engine without the assets is useless if what you wanted was to play Quake the game. Neural nets are another prime example, as you mention. Simulators that rely on measured material property databases for usable results also fall into this category, and so on.
So perhaps what we need is new open source licenses that includes the assets needed for the user to be able to reasonably use the program as a whole.