The decision comes after months of questions about how the document was prepared and checked before publication.

Cabinet approved the draft policy in March 2026, and government published it in April for public comment.

Questions emerged soon after, when media reports found that several citations did not exist or pointed to journals that never published the work. The findings forced a formal withdrawal of the document on 26 April 2026.

Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies Solly Malatsi told Parliament that the department missed the problems before they became public.

He said, “The department had not picked up that there were issues with the references in the draft policy document before the events were exposed in news reports,”

Two officials involved in drafting and checking the document have since been suspended. The department also admitted gaps in its internal review process, especially around how sources were verified before publication.

Malatsi said the government moved to contain the damage after the issue became public. He stated, “It was then that we got the responses to protect the integrity of the policy development process and, obviously, the stain that it has caused not just on the department but also on the government’s overall process of formulating and finalising policy,”

On 14 May 2026, the government appointed an independent panel to rebuild the policy framework. The group is chaired by Professor Benjamin Rosman of the Machine Intelligence and Neural Discovery Institute at the University of the Witwatersrand.

It includes Professor Vukosi Marivate, Professor Alison Gillwald, Heather Irvine, Dr Tshepo Feela, cybersecurity specialist Jabu Mtsweni, and cyber lawyer Lufuno Tshikalange.

Officials expect the revised framework to go back for public comment in January 2027. Until then, South Africa will remain without a formal national AI policy, even as both government and private firms continue to deploy AI systems in daily operations.

The episode has led to queries about oversight in policy development and the growing use of generative AI in official work.

It also places South Africa in a tighter race with countries such as Kenya and Nigeria, which are advancing their own national AI strategies.

Attention has currently shifted to whether the new panel can restore confidence and produce a framework that holds up to standards, both locally and across the continent.

The post South Africa Delays AI Policy to 2027 After Fake References Scandal appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

The lawsuit, filed on March 13, 2026 at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, claims that OpenAI copied close to 100,000 articles from Britannica and its dictionary arm, Merriam-Webster.

According to the complaint, this material was used to train large language models behind ChatGPT.

Britannica says the chatbot can produce responses that are so close to its original entries. It argues that this reduces visits to its own platforms, as users rely on AI-generated summaries instead of going directly to its website.

The company also alleges trademark misuse, stating that its name is sometimes cited in responses in ways that suggest approval where none exists.

In response, OpenAI said its systems are built using publicly available data and operate within the bounds of fair use. A spokesperson said, “Our models empower innovation, and are trained on publicly available data and grounded in fair use.”

Britannica has not publicly expanded on the case since filing. Its representatives did not respond to follow-up questions at the start of the week.

This case adds to other legal disputes involving AI developers and content owners. Over the past year, publishers, authors and artists have challenged how their work is used in training data.

Similar claims have also been brought against other firms, including an ongoing case between Britannica and Perplexity AI, filed in 2025.

Questions including whether using copyrighted material to train AI systems qualify as fair use, have been asked. Technology companies say the process transforms the material into something new, but Publishers disagree, arguing it amounts to copying without consent.

The post Britannica Sues OpenAI Over Alleged Use of Articles to Train ChatGPT appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

In a statement on Tuesday, the commission said it endorsed the “Joint Statement on AI-Generated Imagery and the Protection of Privacy”, a document coordinated by the International Enforcement Cooperation Working Group of the Global Privacy Assembly.

The statement highlights concerns over tools that can create realistic images and videos of identifiable people. Regulators say such tools are being misused to produce non-consensual images, defamatory materials and other harmful content. Children and other vulnerable groups face the greatest risk.

According to the NDPC, the initiative with data authorities urges organisations to put safeguards in place before deploying such systems. It also asks companies to be transparent about how their tools work, set up effective content removal channels and comply with data protection laws in their countries.

AI tools are now widely accessible, and in many cases, they can generate images that look real within seconds. When those images feature real people, the privacy impact is immediate.

The commission said its participation reveals Nigeria’s ongoing efforts to promote responsible use of artificial intelligence, referring to steps already taken at home, including work on a national policy framework.

The Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, Dr Bosun Tijani, previously led the development of Nigeria’s National AI Strategy.

In addition, the NDPC issued its General Application and Implementation Directive (GAID), which requires data controllers and processors to embed privacy protections into their systems from the design stage.

The National Commissioner and Chief Executive Officer of the NDPC, Dr Vincent Olatunji, has now directed that Compliance Audit Returns under the Nigeria Data Protection Act will be used to assess how major data controllers and processors apply AI in their operations.

The commission said the audit process will serve as a benchmark for monitoring responsible data processing practices, especially where AI tools are involved.

The post NDPC Joins 60 Global Data Authorities to Tackle Privacy Risks in AI-Generated Images appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

The company says the feature works in the background, scanning account-level and behavioural signals to judge whether an account is likely run by someone under 18. 

When that threshold is crossed, content limits are switched on automatically. The idea, OpenAI argues, is to give teens a safer version of the product without forcing every user through upfront identity checks.

This is a response to  complaints the company has received over how its tools affect children. OpenAI has been warned by regulators over past incidents involving young users, and this rollout reveals a transition from reactive fixes to a more systemic safeguard.

According to OpenAI, the age prediction system looks at factors such as how long an account has existed, typical usage times, long-term patterns, and the age a user claims when signing up. 

No single signal decides the result. Instead, they are weighed together to reach a probability-based judgement.

When an account is flagged as under 18, ChatGPT applies restrictions around sensitive areas. These include graphic violence, depictions of self-harm, sexual or violent role play, risky online challenges, and content that promotes extreme body ideals or unhealthy dieting. If the system is unsure about someone’s age, it defaults to the safer setting.

OpenAI said in its announcement: “We’re rolling out age prediction on ChatGPT consumer plans to help determine whether an account likely belongs to someone under 18, so the right experience and safeguards can be applied to teens.”

Adults who are wrongly placed into the under-18 experience are not locked out permanently. They can verify their age through Persona, a third-party identity service, by submitting a live selfie and, in some regions, a government-issued ID. OpenAI maintains that it does not receive copies of these documents, only confirmation of age.

The company is also leaning on parental controls, allowing guardians to set usage limits, restrict features such as memory, and receive alerts if signs of serious distress appear. These tools, OpenAI says, are optional but designed to give families more oversight.

The rollout is already live in many regions, with Europe scheduled to follow in the coming weeks due to regulatory requirements. OpenAI says it will monitor how the system performs and adjust it over time, refining which signals are most important and closing gaps where users try to bypass safeguards.

The post ChatGPT Begins Age Prediction Rollout to Tighten Protections for Teen Users appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

This expansion shows a dynamic mix of regulatory changes, private‑sector innovation, expanding connectivity and dynamic digital policy frameworks at home and abroad. 

Internet connectivity and digital adoption have also grown, but not uniformly. In late 2025, Nigeria had 109 million internet users, equal to about 45.5% of the population, while nearly 130 million people were offline, mostly in underserved regions. 

This means Nigeria’s digital economy is large, burgeoning and indispensable to national growth, but still finding it difficult with structural gaps in connectivity, regulation and inclusion.

Hence, let’s examine the policies in Nigeria impacting this growth, as well as the global digital economy policies and standards that are influencing Nigeria’s digital growth and sustainability in 2026.

Nigeria’s Core Digital Economy Policies

The digital sector in the country is anchored in a suite of policy frameworks and proposed laws that have matured through 2025 and into 2026.

1. National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy 2020–2030

At the centre of Nigeria’s digital policy architecture is the National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy (NDEPS) 2020–2030. 

This blueprint identifies key pillars including infrastructure, digital literacy, service platforms, regulation, innovation ecosystems and more, and sets targets for digital integration across sectors.

It is the umbrella under which most other digital reforms sit, including broadband expansion, digital public infrastructure (DPI), skills development and data governance. 

Agencies across government are now aligning their implementation plans to NDEPS goals, making it the principal reference point for regulators and investors alike.

The strategy is the primary driver of Nigeria’s digital policy priorities to 2030.

2. The National Digital Economy and E‑Governance Bill

One of the most consequential legal instruments in 2026 is the National Digital Economy and E‑Governance Bill. 

Passed by the National Assembly and awaiting final assent early this year, the law will be a foundational statute for digital regulation.

Under its provisions:

• Government digital services must meet statutory standards for reliability and interoperability.
• Regulators are empowered to oversee algorithms, digital platforms, data governance and digital identity systems.
• Risk assessments and compliance obligations will be required for digital systems used in public administration and critical services.

The Bill will effectively give regulators expanded powers over digital governance structures, closing gaps in statutory oversight. 

3. Data Protection Framework

Since the 2023 Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA), enforcement has enhanced, with the Nigeria Data Protection Commission issuing guidelines and compliance timelines.

By 2026, the NDPA’s enforcement mechanisms are expected to be fully operational, imposing clear requirements on data controllers and processors, especially for personal and cross‑border data, a critical area for fintech, e‑commerce, healthtech and digital services.

This legislation is compulsory. Firms handling personal data now face defined regulatory obligations, with penalties for non‑compliance adequately enforced.

4. Cybersecurity Policy and Strategy

Nigeria’s National Cybersecurity Policy and Strategy (NCPS), updated in recent years, aims to strengthen national resilience against cyber threats. It emphasises:

• Protection for critical infrastructure
• Incident reporting systems
• Collaboration between public and private sectors
• A risk‑based compliance model

Although there are still gaps in enforcement capacity and coherence across agencies, the NCPS anchored the cybersecurity environment for digital commerce, government platforms and national infrastructure.

Recent studies show that Nigeria still faces enduring challenges in resource coordination and legislative clarity, suggesting further improvements will be needed beyond 2026. 

5. Broadband and Connectivity Policies

Connectivity underpins every aspect of the digital economy. Nigeria’s National Broadband Alliance and successor initiatives aim to achieve broadband access targets set under the National Broadband Plan. 

But then, as of mid‑2025:

• Broadband penetration stood at about 48.8%, short of the original 70% target. 
• Rural areas were still notably underserved, enlarging the rural-urban digital divide.

Policy reforms in 2026 focus more on reducing cost obstacles (e.g., rights‑of‑way reform) and incentivising private investment in fibre and wireless infrastructure.

6. Digital Skills, Innovation and Startup Policies

Nigeria is expanding digital skills initiatives, including collaborations between government, industry and academic institutions. 

These programmes supply talent to the growing tech sector, support innovation clusters and help bridge gaps in tech workforce readiness.

Relevant initiatives include:

• Expanded digital literacy programmes (public and private)
• Targeted training for young professionals in software, cybersecurity, AI‑related skills
• Regulatory incentives that support growth in startup ecosystems

These policies are better recognised as essential to sustaining Nigeria’s digital growth.

Global Policies and Standards Influencing Nigeria (2026)

Nigeria does not operate in a policy vacuum. Multiple international frameworks and regulatory regimes now affect domestic strategy, especially where digital services cross borders or foreign investment and trade are involved.

Here are the key global policies in 2026 that are important to Nigeria:

1. European Union Artificial Intelligence Act

The EU AI Act, adopted in 2024 and set to become fully applicable by 2 August 2026, is the world’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for artificial intelligence. 

It uses a risk‑based classification to regulate AI systems, impose information duties, and ban harmful uses. 

Although it is an EU law, the Act has global effects:

• It applies to providers and deployers whose products affect the EU market, even if based elsewhere.
• It introduces obligations for general‑purpose systems, transparency, impact assessments and documentation.
• Penalties for non‑compliance can be significant.

For Nigerian digital product developers and exporters, compliance with the EU AI Act is becoming more of a commercial necessity if they serve EU customers or integrate with platforms operating in Europe.

The Act’s phased compliance timeline and extraterritorial reach mean that businesses worldwide, including in Nigeria, must adjust governance and product development practices in the new year to avoid market limitations.

2. African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) Digital Trade Protocol

The AfCFTA Digital Trade Protocol is part of Africa’s trade pact and seeks common standards for digital trade, including:

• E‑commerce regulations
• Consumer protection
• Electronic transactions
• Interoperable standards for services

AfCFTA signatories like Nigeria have taken steps to implement these protocols, making the country a digital trade champion in Africa. 

This framework reduces conflict for cross‑border digital services within the continent, encouraging harmonised regulation and a larger integrated market.

3. WTO and Digital Trade Initiatives

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the World Bank are working on projects supporting digital trade uptake in Africa. The emphasis is on reducing limitations to data flows, enabling digital export services, and harmonising policies with international norms.

Nigeria’s engagement in these processes affects its trade policy and digital market regulations, as the country works to align with global trade expectations. 

4. Global Digital Governance Principles

Various multilateral initiatives, especially under the United Nations and G7/OECD forums, are producing guiding principles on digital rights, human‑centred governance, and ethical use of new technologies.

While these frameworks are not binding, they influence investor expectations, normative benchmarks for regulation, and bilateral cooperation agreements.

Sectoral Impacts: How Policies Affect Key Industries

Fintech and Payments

Fintech is one of the fastest‑growing sub‑sectors of the digital economy, helping drive revenue growth. Payment systems, digital banking, and e‑commerce platforms are directly affected by:

• Data protection laws
• Cross‑border data flow expectations
• Digital identity policy
• AfCFTA e‑commerce frameworks

Nigeria’s regulatory approach aims to strike a balance between innovation and consumer protection.

Artificial Intelligence Beyond Compliance

AI is a strategic focus of both domestic and global policy:

• Nigerian policy levers include evolving digital regulation under the National Digital Economy and E‑Governance Bill.
• EU AI Act compliance affects products and services destined for Europe.
• Global best practices influence national frameworks and industry standards.

AI governance in 2026 will be more about risk oversight, accountability and interoperability.

Digital Infrastructure and Public Services

Digital public infrastructure such as identity systems, interoperable platforms and reliable broadband are central to policy execution.

Broadband expansion, DPI rollout, and regulatory certainty are critical for long‑term digital inclusion and competitiveness.

Policy Synergies, Gaps and Opportunities

While Nigeria has a growing policy toolkit, there are still challenges:

• Digital Divide: Broadband and internet access is still uneven, especially in rural areas. 
• Regulatory Coordination: Overlapping mandates between regulators can slow implementation.
• Global Compliance: Adhering to global norms (e.g., the EU AI Act) requires capacity building and investment in governance systems.

The opportunities are quite obvious:

• Alignment with AfCFTA positions Nigeria at the heart of African digital trade.
• Global frameworks bring a chance to signal regulatory maturity to investors.
• Domestic laws now provide clearer rules for data protection and AI.

In 2026, Nigeria’s digital economy has matured from a nascent sector to a major growth engine, underpinned by solid policy frameworks, energetic private innovation, and active engagement with global regulatory regimes.

In 2026, the digital economy policies in the sector will involve implementation, compliance, infrastructure expansion and capacity development. 

And yes, the foundations are now in place for Nigeria to benefit from its internal digital market, and also compete globally, provided that policymakers, businesses and citizens work in concert to close gaps, adopt standards, and sustain digital growth.

The post Top Digital Economy Policies to Watch in 2026 appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

The company says it is working to quickly close those gaps, calling the content illegal and unacceptable.

Users have shared screenshots showing Grok’s public media feed populated with altered images. In several cases, people uploaded photos and asked the chatbot to modify them. The results, according to Grok, crossed a legal and ethical line.

“There are isolated cases where users prompted for and received AI images depicting minors in minimal clothing,” Grok said in a public post. “xAI has safeguards, but improvements are ongoing to block such requests entirely.”

The chatbot went further, acknowledging internal failures. “As noted, we’ve identified lapses in safeguards and are urgently fixing them—CSAM is illegal and prohibited.” Grok did not explain how long the issue lasted or how many users were affected.

In another exchange on X, the chatbot tried to put the incident in context, arguing that most harmful outputs can be stopped before they appear. It added that “no system is 100% foolproof”, while saying xAI is strengthening its filters and reviewing reports from users.

Regulators in both the United States and Europe are warning that generative tools can be misused to create child sexual abuse material, even when no real child is involved. 

Under the EU’s AI Act and existing child protection laws, companies are expected to prevent such content outright, making any failure a potential legal risk.

Advocacy groups have also argued that AI-generated abuse material, though synthetic, can still encourage harmful behaviour and demand. From that perspective, the Grok incident exposes how fragile current safety systems can be when faced with determined users.

Grok is xAI’s flagship product and is tightly integrated into X, formerly Twitter. It is marketed as a challenger to OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini, with an emphasis on humour and a rebellious tone. 

Reports say that same positioning may complicate efforts to enforce strict safety boundaries, especially on a platform already criticised for weak moderation.

On public reactions, images attributed to Grok spread quickly on X, prompting a new case of Elon Musk’s approach to content control. When Reuters contacted xAI for comment, the company responded with a short message: “Legacy Media Lies”.

That reply has only added to the issue about transparency and responsibility in the AI sector. Warnings about trust in chatbots being eroded if companies appear dismissive when serious safety concerns emerge, have been released, particularly where child protection is involved.

For now, xAI says fixes on the safety of Grok are underway.

The post xAI Admits Safety Lapses After Grok Generates Inappropriate Images of Minors on X appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

This follows reports that CEO Sam Altman declared a “code red” inside the company in early December, halting side projects and pulling teams into a faster development sprint. 

The urgency was linked to Google’s latest innovations, which had placed Gemini 3 at the top of key performance rankings across reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks.

OpenAI says GPT-5.2 brings stronger general intelligence, better coding results, and far longer context handling. The company believes these improvements will help users complete more demanding work, particularly tasks that involve spreadsheets, complex documents, and project-heavy workflows. 

Interestingly, the new model stretches to handle up to a million tokens, a big difference from the previous model.

Google has been keen to highlight what Gemini 3 is capable of across text, audio, images and video, and analysts say its tight integration with Workspace and Android gives it an advantage with corporate users. 

Even with that, Altman played down the internal panic when he spoke on CNBC, saying: “Gemini 3 has had less of an impact on our metrics than we feared.” Google has not responded to requests for comment.

OpenAI is rolling out GPT-5.2 in three versions: Instant for quick responses, Thinking for slower but more reasoned answers, and Pro for enterprise-level performance. Paid ChatGPT users will receive them first. The company also states it will continue to support GPT-5.1, GPT-5 and GPT-4.1 on its API, giving developers more flexibility.

Away from the technical competition, OpenAI is also moving into entertainment. Disney has confirmed a $1 billion investment in the company and will allow its Sora video generator to use characters and worlds from Star Wars, Pixar and Marvel. 

This is one of the largest licensing deals yet between Hollywood and an AI firm, and it sets up OpenAI as a direct partner in digital content production. Microsoft, still OpenAI’s biggest backer with about $13 billion committed since 2019, continues to host the company’s models on Azure.

Industry forecasts show spending on cloud-based AI services is expected to rise sharply, with Gartner estimating it will exceed $723 billion next year. Many companies are already relying on GPT models for coding assistance, document processing and data insights. According to OpenAI, enterprise usage has climbed roughly 40% in the past year.

However, regulators in the US and Europe are examining safety standards, competition risks and copyright issues, with Disney’s licensing deal likely to draw even closer attention.

The post OpenAI Counters Google’s Gemini 3 Surge with New GPT-5.2 appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

A Financial Times report revealed that both companies are exploring alternative ways to handle the risks associated with how their AI models were trained. Copyright owners, including authors, publishers, and media houses, have filed more than a dozen lawsuits against tech companies including OpenAI, Microsoft, Meta, and Anthropic, accusing them of using protected works without authorisation to train their large language models.

To manage these legal threats, OpenAI has reportedly partnered with Aon, one of the world’s leading insurance firms, to secure coverage worth up to $300 million for emerging AI-related risks. However, some sources told the Financial Times that the actual figure could be lower, and regardless, it still falls far short of what would be required to cover the potential damages from ongoing lawsuits.

Kevin Kalinich, Aon’s Global Cyber Risk Head, explained that the insurance industry itself is finding it difficult to match the scale of risk caused by AI model providers. “The insurance sector broadly lacks enough capacity for (model) providers,” he said.

Because of this gap, OpenAI is reportedly considering “self-insurance”, essentially setting aside investor capital in a protected pool to absorb possible legal costs. Discussions have also surfaced about creating a “captive,” an internal insurance structure used by large firms to manage risks that the traditional market cannot handle.

Anthropic appears to be taking a similar route. According to the Financial Times, the company is using part of its own funds to cover a $1.5 billion settlement that was preliminarily approved by a California federal judge last month. 

The case was filed by a group of authors who alleged that their works were used to train Anthropic’s AI system, Claude, without consent.

The number of copyright claims is forcing AI companies—and their backers—to confront questions about financial accountability and transparency. If investor funds are being used to offset legal risks, governance issues inevitably follow: who decides how much to reserve for potential liabilities, and how are investors’ interests safeguarded?

Analysts believe these developments could change how AI startups raise and allocate capital. Investors may soon demand clearer disclosures on data sources, litigation exposure, and risk management frameworks before funding new ventures.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Copyright Office is still assessing whether training AI systems on copyrighted content amounts to infringement, while the European Union’s AI Act could compel firms to reveal their training datasets, opening another front of legal vulnerability for AI developers.

Neither OpenAI, Anthropic, nor Aon has commented on the report.

The post OpenAI, Anthropic May Use Investor Funds to Tackle Growing Copyright Lawsuits appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

The company disclosed these findings in its August 2025 Threat Intelligence Report, raising fresh alarms over the fast-growing misuse of artificial intelligence in cybercrime.

According to the report, attackers attempted to manipulate Claude into: drafting phishing emails with psychological precision, generating and debugging malicious code, bypassing filters through repeated prompts, producing persuasive propaganda posts at scale, and even guiding inexperienced hackers with step-by-step instructions. 

In one case, Claude Code was used in a campaign that targeted 17 organisations, from healthcare providers to government agencies, with ransom demands reaching $500,000.

Anthropic confirmed that its security defences intercepted the activity. Compromised accounts were banned, high-risk prompts blocked, and restrictions placed on access to financial, adult, and pirated content. 

The company also introduced mandatory confirmation for risky actions such as publishing or sharing sensitive personal data. These measures, it said, cut the success rate of prompt injections from 23.6% to 11.2%, a notable improvement in system resilience.

The company explained: “We will continue publishing reports whenever we detect major threats. Our goal is to help the wider community understand how these systems may be exploited and how to stop them.”

Earlier this year, Microsoft’s Azure OpenAI service was breached, allowing hackers to generate harmful content by sidestepping safeguards. OpenAI, in June, launched a dedicated initiative to combat malicious use of AI in covert operations and cyber espionage. 

Google’s Gemini has also faced issues for what was described as inadequate transparency in its safety measures.

Governments are now stepping in. The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act began enforcement on 2 August 2025. It introduces strict risk management rules for general-purpose AI, cybersecurity-by-design requirements for high-risk systems, and penalties of up to €35 million or 7% of global turnover. 

In the United States, the White House has secured voluntary commitments from major AI developers, but critics argue that only binding regulation will close the gap between safeguards and threats.

With AI models becoming more powerful, the line between innovation and exploitation will only grow sharper.

The post Anthropic Blocks Cybercriminals Exploiting Claude for Phishing, Ransomware and Influence Operations appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.

As of July 2025, the internet infrastructure giant now blocks all AI crawlers by default unless they’ve either paid for access or received explicit permission from the content owner.

The company’s new product, Pay Per Crawl, lets publishers charge AI firms a fee every time they crawl their content. If a crawler doesn’t pay, it gets hit with a “402 Payment Required” response, a rarely used HTTP status code that could become the foundation of a new internet revenue model.

Cloudflare powers nearly 20% of the internet. This shift, if widely adopted, could cut off AI companies from training on a vast portion of the web, unless they pay.

Major publishers, including Condé Nast, TIME, BuzzFeed, The Atlantic, Gannett, and others such as Reddit, Pinterest, and Stack Overflow, have already signed on. 

Many of them have seen advertising and referral traffic dwindle in recent years as AI-generated summaries and chatbot answers have increasingly replaced the need to click through to the original source.

“This is just the beginning of a new model for the internet,” said Stephanie Cohen, Cloudflare’s Chief Strategy Officer. “The change in traffic patterns has been rapid, and something needed to change.”

That change is reflected in the data. According to Cloudflare, Google’s crawl-to-click ratio has collapsed from 6:1 to 18:1 in the last six months, suggesting users are increasingly finding what they need directly within the search results, especially via AI Overviews. OpenAI’s ratio is far more extreme at 1,500:1.

Historically, search engines indexed the web with the tacit understanding that referrals would follow, generating value for content creators. But AI firms have upended that agreement, lifting vast amounts of content to train their models and offer summarised responses, all while bypassing the original creators entirely.

Some firms go further by ignoring established web standards like robots.txt, which is intended to block unauthorised scraping. Despite publishers’ attempts to draw boundaries, many AI companies insist they haven’t broken any laws.

The legal pushback has already begun. The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in late 2023 for copyright infringement. Reddit recently took legal action against Anthropic for allegedly harvesting user comments without permission, even though scraping was explicitly prohibited via robots.txt. BBC and Ziff Davis have filed similar lawsuits.

This escalating issue is happening in parallel with massive drops in web engagement. In the U.S., 60% of searches now end without a single click, and click-through rates have plunged by 30% between 2024 and 2025. 

Publishers are being squeezed at both ends, their traffic is drying up, and their content is being repurposed without compensation.

Cloudflare’s CEO Matthew Prince framed the initiative as both a defensive and visionary move: “This is about safeguarding the future of a free and vibrant internet.” He pointed at a long-term plan to create a transparent and open marketplace for content access, where AI firms would be required to negotiate fair rates for crawling and training.

For now, Pay Per Crawl is available as a private beta. Cloudflare handles both authentication and payments, serving as the intermediary between web publishers and AI companies.

The post Cloudflare Blocks AI Bots, Launches Paywall to Help Publishers Get Paid appeared first on Tech | Business | Economy.