Taken to the extreme, sure. But every voluntary interaction necessarily "leaks value", being non-zero-sum.
This word "training" keeps getting used, and I think it's at the heart of this disagreement - viewing learning as a discrete top-down event as opposed to a continuous process.
GP's example is akin to an employer paying for a bachelor's degree. My comment is easiest thought of in terms of company-specific processes. For any specific 'skill', the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Software is a bit of a rare case where most tools are highly complex, but are also freely (as-in-beer) accessible. Tool choice is heavily driven by fashion, yet fashion being foreign to our worldview we're blind to this. Is $software_package a fundamental that every college graduate should know, or basically equivalent to an in-house framework? Who knows...