> Yes? I can't use the licensed model to train content?
Well, that's the point; free software does not mean "no restrictions". Most of the FLOSS licenses come with restrictions too, just different ones. That doesn't make them "not FLOSS".
If you're arguing that licenses can't be FLOSS if they have restrictions, then you're going to have an uphill battle to convince people that the GPL isn't FLOSS.
FOSS is usually defined by the FSF's Free Software definition, and the Open Source Initiative's Open Source Definition. I don't think either field-of-use restrictions nor per-user royalties are acceptable under either definition.
What makes it not FOSS? After all, FOSS comes with restrictions too, you know, like the GPL.
Does the restriction on using the licensed content to train models in any way deter you from using the licensed content at all?