Or same can be said about media "piracy". Or ransomwares.
States have forever regulated things that are not possible to enforce purely technically.
Piracy most often isn't treated as a criminal matter, but a civil one - few countries punish piracy severely, but companies are allowed to sue the pirate.
I agree with OP in principle - regulating generative AI use would be way harder than piracy or whatever, especially since all of it can be done purely locally and millions of people already have the software downloaded. And that's not getting into the reasoning behind a ban - piracy and similar "digital crimes" are banned because they directly harm someone, while someone launching Stable Diffusion on their PC doesn't do much of anything.
UNCLOS, Part VII, Section 1, Article 100 https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unc...
>> Duty to cooperate in the repression of piracy
>> All States shall cooperate to the fullest possible extent in the repression of piracy on the high seas or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State.
We could have just added "private computer" to the definition of piracy, and it largely would have applied.
>> Definition of piracy
>> Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
>> (a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed [...] on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
No sane person could ever implement anything like this. This is like saying that we could "just" add the word "digital" to the laws prohibiting murder to make playing GTA illegal.
Mostly committed by private citizens in pursuit of profit
That all nations of the world have an interest in suppressing to encourage free trade that economically benefits them
But which some countries at various times have a geopolitical interest in supporting
... you're right, they have no logical or legal connections at all.
The point stands - no jurisdiction that I know of treats digital piracy similarly to naval piracy, and there is no strong argument in favor of doing so.
The canonical eBay/PayPal fraud from eastern Europe example?
> most individuals pirate for personal needs, not profit.
But most piracy is done by individuals in pursuit of profit, not for personal need.
your piracy example is better. consider that it's the rise of more convenient options (netflix and spotify) not some effective policy that curtailed the prevalence of piracy.
The turning point was earlier than Netflix or Spotify – it was the iTunes Store. It was such a dramatic shift, people labelled Steve Jobs as “the man who persuaded the world to pay for content”.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2011/aug/28/s...
In fact, a low clearance rate can be evidence of trying to regulate far beyond one's capacity to consistently enforce; if you weren't trying to regulate very hard, it would be much easier to have a high clearance rate for violations of what regulations you do have.