GoKawiilOne year ago, we declared the first Content Independence Day , and we gave website owners the means to take back control of their content. The deal between crawlers and website owners that had held up for 30 years — we crawl you, and you get referrals — was no longer true. AI was taking everything and sending back nothing, presenting an existential threat to website owners. And so we launched a one-click "Block AI Bots" option, along with a Pay-Per-Crawl marketplace .
A lot has changed in a year. Last July, conversations around “AI bots” centered around blocking AI training without compensation, pointing to the win–lose deal where content was used for model training with no value driven back to the website owner. But a desire for more nuance has emerged: Content owners still want to be able to protect their content, and they should be compensated for the original content that they work hard to create, curate, and share. We also know that locking down content isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution; website owners want more options than resorting to “block all automation, every time.”
If you run a small site, the problem isn’t just that someone could train models on your content — it's that nobody can find you in the first place. So you have to make a Faustian bargain: either show up in search and let AI train on you, or risk losing discoverability. This unfairly advantages incumbent search providers if they use the same bots for both search and training; and this unfair advantage incentivizes new players to be evasive as they try to close the competitive gap.
Now, AI can be anything
Today, AI can be in anything. Google search has changed from being sorted by AI to being a full answer engine that answers your question directly on the results page. And Google is not unique in this position — this is the direction in which “search” is moving.
We could debate the cutoff for what qualifies as “AI” today, just to find that the standard changes tomorrow. So, instead of defining a bot primarily as “AI” or not, our updated approach to classification will ask deeper questions about bot or agent behavior: What are they doing on my site? What are they storing? And how will they reshare my content?
A pragmatic taxonomy
To address these questions, we need a more nuanced view — a pragmatic taxonomy that aligns with the AI use cases our customers care about. So we are opening the discussion beyond AI training alone and focusing on three AI use cases that we want all customers to be able to manage:
Search: any behavior that collects or indexes your content, so it can answer questions about it later. The key is that Search is proactively building a database of your site to later respond to queries with. Site owners should expect to get referral traffic or other equitable compensation as a result.
any behavior that collects or indexes your content, so it can answer questions about it later. The key is that Search is proactively building a database of your site to later respond to queries with. Site owners should expect to get referral traffic or other equitable compensation as a result. Agent: automated behavior that is acting, usually in real time, on a person's behalf, to get something done right now. This includes chat fetch bots (e.g., ChatGPT-User) and browser-use agents (e.g., Gemini or Claude driving Chrome). The key is that it visits your web application in order to complete a job, and often there's a human waiting on the other end.
... continue reading