[wvenable]

The paywall news sites want to have their cake and eat it to -- they want web crawlers, like Google, to read the full contents of the article but hide it from site visitors.

If they simply put all their content behind a paywall entirely and effectively then this would be a non-issue.

If ChatGPT is getting this content it's literally because they allow it.

[gruez]

>The paywall news sites want to have their cake and eat it to -- they want web crawlers, like Google, to read the full contents of the article but hide it from site visitors.

There's nothing contradictory about this? Plenty of companies give free access to journalist/reviewers/influencers, with the hope that they'd draw in paying customers. Wanting to only give free access to certain people isn't "want to have their cake and eat it to". It's standard business practice and well within the rights of publishers/rights holders to do.

[wvenable]

Yes there is. They don't want ChatGPT to have access but they don't prevent access by ChatGPT. Technically they're actually giving everyone free access. By actually legitimately preventing access they would completely mitigate this problem.

[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

> They don't want ChatGPT to have access but they don't prevent access by ChatGPT.

They don't want ChatGPT to do certain things after accessing it and they don't prevent access by ChatGPT. They don't mind if ChatGPT accesses it.