The true story of the Luddites is just one more chapter in the long history of state repression of the working people any time they organize together to improve their lot.
The law shouldn't protect the status quo, it should protect human beings. Unfortunately, the law usually protects the wealthy first and only.
> You think, maybe, it’s fair for the people being replaced to feel a bit upset about it?
I think it makes all sorts of sense that people are upset about stable diffusion.
And, people being upset isn't a good reason to change the law or outlaw the new technology.
Today the word "luddite" is a slur. But luddites were real people who made the same argument you're making. In their case, they were a secret group of textile workers so upset by the introduction of the mechanical loom that they went around sabotaging equipment.
Suppose we wound the clock back and the luddites won a legal battle and successfully outlawed the mechanical loom in the UK. Knowing what we know now, would you support a law like that to protect the jobs of textile workers in the 19th century? I sure wouldn't - it would have decimated the economy of the UK and stunted innovation.
Thats the danger of using the law to protect the status quo. Sometimes the status quo needs to change to make room for what comes next, regardless of how painful that change is.
The law doesn't exist to protect your business model.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite
We're at the verge of the second industrial revolution. I have no idea how it shakes out, but I don't think clinging desperately to the old ways of doing things will be a winning strategy in the long run.