Who says "Department of Parks"?

You see a car driving right at you. It looks like it's going to hit you in five seconds. Who's to say it's not going to hit you in five days? Seems like a fair analogy.

I'd love to see some incentive for guests to report violations. Like refunded stays and coverage for moving to a last-minute hotel.

I agree with you here. I think a reasonable example is the Wayback Machine. Very useful for archiving web content that has disappeared for whatever reason (usually lapse of web hosting). But if site/content creators want their content excluded, the Wayback Machine operators are very responsive and will stop hosting this content. I anticipate that asking for your content to be excluded from training sets after the fact will be much less pleasantly received, as the model would have to be relearned and this is expensive.

It ain't shit without all the human effort that went into creating the training data. To my displeasure, I think the law will see it your way, but I don't think people should be so flippant about marginalizing over so much human creative effort. I have no problem with acquiring the rights to photos to train image generators, because that's the true cost of these products. It has nothing to do with final file size.

AI does not draw inspiration. Seeing something and being inspired by it is human. Processing lots of photos of artworks to produce similar works rehashes that data in a fundamentally different way.

I'd go a step further and question how you can copyright these outputs if you don't own everything the model was trained on.