Home The Sell Sider Stop Debating And Start Acting: A Unified Front Against AI Is Publishers’ Only Hope

Stop Debating And Start Acting: A Unified Front Against AI Is Publishers’ Only Hope

SHARE:
By Scott Messer, The AdTech Therapist & Principal at Messer Media

When the peer-to-peer site Napster unleashed digital audio on the web, the record industry couldn’t move fast enough. It took about a year and a half for the first major lawsuit to shut the service down. The battle was won, but the war for control over music distribution was irrevocably lost.

Today, the publishing industry is facing its own Napster moment, and I fear we are making the same mistakes. The uncompensated theft of content to train large language models (LLMs) has created an existential crisis. While I am in favor of the promise generative AI brings, the current approach threatens carnage by subsidizing a new content consumption interface that destroys the economic incentives to create original content.

The publishing community’s response has been an uncoordinated chucking of stones at the AI Goliaths. At least the record industry had the Recording Industry Association of America (and Metallica) to bring a unified suit against the peer-to-peer poster child. Publishers, however, lack the tools, mechanics, common language and coordinated approach to address this systemic threat.

The problem is threefold: Many companies are working on solutions; these solutions vary in every aspect from technology to business model; and the AI companies are not even entertaining scaled solutions yet. To make matters worse, the individual licensing deals struck by large publishers undermine the broader effort, as these players are now content to sit out the collective fight.

Publishers must coalesce into a singular front to gain a credible bargaining position and stop the bleeding. From there, we must put the processes in place to actually operate a licensing mechanism (like adding streaming rights to record deals to enable Spotify) and then rebuild our businesses. It took the recording industry nearly 15 years to recover from the upheaval of free music and transform its business model. We have no time to waste.  

Three paths to the bargaining table

If we want to compel LLMs into meaningful, scaled licensing programs, I believe there are only three ways to bring them to the table:

  1. Government intervention: The SEC or DOJ could issue an injunction that orders LLMs to pay for content. While individual lawsuits are helpful, this path is unlikely to be swift, and no group of publishers currently carries the same weight as the recording conglomerates of the Napster era.
  2. The Google gambit: Google could proactively start licensing content through Google Search Console. This would curry favor with the industry, and publishers could then deploy “hard” blocks against other LLM crawlers, forcing them to adopt a similar licensing model as their access to free content disappears. This would be a quick resolution, but it’s unlikely Google will start handing out checks tomorrow.
  3. Publisher unity: Publishers could band together to create a crawler-tight wall that prevents all LLMs from freeloading. This collective action would force LLMs to make concessions and engage in scaled licensing programs.

Of the three, this final option is the most likely to succeed, but only if publishers can actually get their act together.

A unified front 

Content creation is not a function destined to be made obsolete, like the telegram. It is fundamental. LLM content theft requires a unified front for negotiations. While encouraging conversations are happening in disparate circles, they are not happening with enough coordination or speed.

To help everyone level-set and accelerate a coordinated strategy, I have developed the Generative AI Licensing Matrix. This resource focuses specifically on the companies that are helping publishers develop the defenses and mechanisms required to compel and work with LLMs to license content. It is intended to drive conversations and progress.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

The time for isolated actions and wishful thinking is over. We must unify, build our defenses and force the issue before the war for original content is irrevocably lost.

The Sell Sider” is a column written by the sell side of the digital media community.

Follow Scott Messer and AdExchanger on LinkedIn.

For more articles featuring Scott Messer, click here.

Must Read

Jamie Seltzer, global chief data and technology officer, Havas Media Network, speaks to AdExchanger at CES 2026.

CES 2026: What’s Real – And What’s BS – When It Comes To AI

Ad industry experts call out trends to watch in 2026 and separate the real AI use cases having an impact today from the AI hype they heard at CES.

New Startup Pinch AI Tackles The Growing Problem Of Ecommerce Return Scams

Fraud is eating into retail profits. A new startup called Pinch AI just launched with $5 million in funding to fight back.

Comic: Shopper Marketing Data

CPG Data Seller SPINS Moves Into Media With MikMak Acquisition

On Wednesday, retail and CPG data company SPINS added a new piece with its acquisition of MikMak, a click-to-buy ad tech and analytics startup that helps optimize their commerce media.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

How Valvoline Shifted Marketing Gears When It Became A Pure-Play Retail Brand

Believe it or not, car oil change service company Valvoline is in the midst of a fascinating retail marketing transformation.

AdExchanger's Big Story podcast with journalistic insights on advertising, marketing and ad tech

The Big Story: Live From CES 2026

Agents, streamers and robots, oh my! Live from the C-Space campus at the Aria Casino in Las Vegas, our team breaks down the most interesting ad tech trends we saw at CES this year.

Monopoly Man looks on at the DOJ vs. Google ad tech antitrust trial (comic).

2025: The Year Google Lost In Court And Won Anyway

From afar, it looks like Google had a rough year in antitrust court. But zoom in a bit and it becomes clear that the past year went about as well as Google could have hoped for.