There's no legal framework for this rule, and you really don't want one. This is like a math textbook being selectively copyrighted as "you can read this, but you can't use the knowledge to make money". Do you want to live in that world?
What I mean by things that I've created, I mean that I've literally brought into the world. A novel, a photograph, some code. Those things did not already exist, but only came about due to my thoughts and work. So I don't find it unreasonable to say I would like to limit for a reasonable period of time (that I absolutely acknowledge is WAY too long in the USA right now) their abuse by others to make a buck off of.
I bet that trying to blur the line is part of the AI startup propaganda strategy.
There's no reason to think the legal rights enjoyed by people transfer to machines by analogy. My car can't be party to a contract because I can, just like the fact that I can learn doesn't mean any content can be loaded into a retrieval system [1].
[1] No, redefining the term "learning" to include "performing certain calculations on a computer" does not make those calculations the same as human learning.