[mindslight]

No, this is not what you want - because the straightforward outcome would be that your personal data was declared to be worth $X, which you were compensated for and then traded away as consideration to use the service. So then the service has an ongoing license to your data, which they sublicense to Facebook, and absolutely nothing changes besides legally cementing their surveillance regime. What we need is the definition of consent ala the GDPR that does not allow personal information to be permanently bought but only temporarily licensed with the requirement of ongoing consent that can be withdrawn at any time.

[datavirtue]

It needs to be bid on. Garden variety capitalism and market activity.

[mindslight]

You're going to need to expand more, because you're ultimately still implying some sort of new right to control your personal data compared to how things are.

"Market activity" occurs at the level of abstraction above the foundation of what ownership is defined as. Define ownership wrong, and it turns into just another sleight of hand where you've theoretically got rights, but in practice it's impractical to extract yourself and assert them in a meaningful sense.

Defining rights properly is what my comment was focused on. After that is done, you can build whatever system you like for companies to encourage users to allow the use of their personal data.