MIT doesn't bar additional restrictions, so you could say this is MIT except you can't train on it. GPL on the other hand does not allow additional restrictions and therefore the code would not be compatible.
but you can't copyright the output anyways. which either makes the restriction on training void or, it means the owners of the model own the copyright, and they only transfer some of the ownership to you. is there such an ownership transfer statement? i haven't seen one yet.
"MIT doesn't bar additional restrictions" is a bit weird of a statement when the MIT license itself already gave permission to do almost anything with the code. My emphasis.
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software *without restriction*, [...]
but you can't copyright the output anyways. which either makes the restriction on training void or, it means the owners of the model own the copyright, and they only transfer some of the ownership to you. is there such an ownership transfer statement? i haven't seen one yet.