Verleger finden das KI-Zeitalter nicht besonders lukrativ – „Die meisten Verleger werden keine nennenswerten Einnahmen aus der Lizenzierung von Inhalten an Technologieunternehmen erzielen“: politische Kommunikation. Professor

By Rasmus Kleis Nielsen:

*[…] Dotdash Meredith is on course to generate over $1.5 billion in revenues in 2024, more than a third of it from print. So the OpenAI deal is equal to about 1% of the publisher’s total revenue.*

*If that strikes you as low, remember that OpenAI’s deal with Axel Springer, said to be worth about $10 million per year, is worth well under 1% of Springer’s media revenues.*

*Welcome, surely. Lucrative, in a sense. Game changer? Hardly.*

*Continued decline in print revenues alone will have a far bigger impact on both Dotdash Meredith and Axel Springer’s revenues in 2025 than their deals with OpenAI. And this is for two of the so far very few publishers who have actually gotten deals!*

*[…] Given that various lawsuits and lobbying efforts will likely drag on, the main factor that could lead to a different outcome would be a dramatic political intervention.*

*The question then is whether publishers can expect this — or should even seek it — from the very politicians they also say they hold to account. (Would, say, the U.S. news media want to rely on favors from the incoming Trump administration?)*

*So my prediction for 2025 is that most publishers will not get any meaningful revenue from licensing content to technology companies, and that those who do are likely to be large publishers who get at most a few percent of incremental revenue.*

*For most publishers, while perhaps a disappointing prospect, I hope this will also be liberating. If they don’t stand around waiting for the Godot of elusive AI licensing deals, they can focus on what matters — creating value not for tech companies’ training models, but for members of the public who want to make sense of the world beyond personal experience.* ■