New York Times sets three guardrails for AI licensing deals

The New York Times has established three core principles that determine whether it will license content to AI companies, according to Adam Greenberg, the publisher's vice president of strategic partnerships.

Speaking at the Digiday Publishing Summit in Miami last week, Greenberg outlined the framework the Times uses to evaluate AI licensing opportunities: fair value exchange, partnership sustainability, and content control. All three conditions must be met for the Times to proceed with a deal.

Why it matters

As AI platforms increasingly scrape publisher content for training and inference, the Times' approach offers a template for how major publishers can negotiate from a position of strength rather than desperation. The framework prioritizes long-term business sustainability over quick revenue, a stance that smaller publishers may struggle to maintain but that could shape industry standards.

The three non-negotiables

The Times requires express permission or a formal agreement before AI companies can use its content. "The right value exchange" means AI platforms must compensate the publisher appropriately, Greenberg said.

Second, partnerships must be sustainable beyond one-time payments. "It can't just be this one-time lump sum, and then there's no engagement, there's no partnership beyond revenue," Greenberg explained. The Times wants ongoing collaboration that can benefit the broader publisher ecosystem.

Third, the publisher demands control over how and where its content appears in AI systems. "That can be tricky, but that's important to us," Greenberg noted.

The Times' recent licensing deal with Amazon meets all three criteria, Greenberg said, though he declined to discuss other partnerships. He acknowledged that few deals have been signed industry-wide because "those conditions are tough to meet in a lot of different ways."

Marketplace challenges remain

Greenberg, who spent 14 years at Google building publisher-focused initiatives including AMP and Web Stories, called emerging AI content marketplaces "underdeveloped." He expects these platforms will take years to mature.

Publishers face fundamental uncertainties when structuring deals: how content will be used, how to value it, how to prevent pricing races to the bottom, who owns AI-generated outputs, and whether the revenue justifies fragmenting content for "fractions of a cent."

"I think where we end up is very unclear," Greenberg said. "It's very hard to get these things going."

Despite the challenges, partnerships can give publishers leverage to push for better attribution, linking, and referral mechanisms that drive traffic back to their sites. "You certainly have more influence if you're engaged with someone than if you're not," he said.

The Times has doubled its partnerships team to 10 people since Greenberg joined last summer. The group works closely with product, audience, communications, legal, and executive teams when evaluating AI deals.

Because the Times operates primarily as a subscription business focused on building direct audience relationships and daily habits, it won't pursue any deal that undermines that core mission, Greenberg said.

The details were first reported by Digiday.