Artificial Intelligence and Data Recycling: Claiming Your Lost Share

Testing Environment:

Different devices and new accounts, search and reasoning models that know nothing about me, a mobile phone and a laptop, and four different accounts.

Testing Method:

I searched for search terms related to topics I had written about on the web, and used interconnected search terms to link the keywords together, for example, OBR Group and technology. I also placed more than one article and project across multiple open platforms, some old and some new, as well as various forums.

Testing Mechanism:

I logged into completely new and different accounts using different devices: first the mobile phone, then the laptop. I then entered the terms I wanted to search for, and within minutes, it presented information and polished it as though it had discovered something rare for me. It started talking about me using my recycled data!! Using tokens from my subscription..?

For the first time, I found sources from 9 recognised websites and platforms. If I had not known myself, I would have been completely convinced that what stood behind this company was a massive, major project worthy of entering into a contract with them.

Objective of the Test:

To demonstrate and prove conclusively:

1. Recycling and selling publicly available data for free, then repackaging it in a polished way for you, even if you are the one who originally wrote and prepared it, using your subscription's token system, usage counter, and balance.

2. It does not care about the content. It embellishes the results for you as though they were relevant to your question, without evaluating or considering the credibility of the source or other risks.

Untested Theories:

In the event that a team of researchers deliberately places inputs and instructions composed of programming codes and research topics across multiple web pages and public platforms, and this is repeated more than once, then if any user asks the agent and does not find a convincing answer through search crawling and deep inference keywords, they will reach these pages that contain misleading information.

Investment Project Summary :

The Opportunity: As AI agents increasingly crawl digital content, there is a pressing need for a mechanism that enables website owners to monetize the consumption of their data.

The Solution: An intermediary platform that automatically charges AI crawlers (via the HTTP 402 protocol), collects payments from agent providers, and redistributes revenue to content owners.

The Model: A shift from "pay-per-crawl" to "pay-per-actual-use" (when content is cited in AI answers), ensuring fair pricing and tying revenue to real value.

The Market: An emerging market led by Cloudflare, Google, and Microsoft, still in early experimental stages, creating an entry window for a specialized project focused on identity verification and precise billing.

The Competitive Edge: Verification infrastructure (Web Bot Auth) and accurate citation tracking, with a revenue model based on a commission per transaction, globally scalable with the growth of AI adoption.

Your Lost Share:

When I ran the test, I got complete answers, and it cost a few tokens as a deep reasoning search. I am the official and intellectual owner of the website, the articles, and the research. However, the agent did not take that into consideration and did not know that I am the owner of the website, but it brought my information and took the cost from me. The commercial and legal question: Do I have the right to that? Yes, I have the right to that, since I have an official legal document, a digital company, an officially registered domain, and all the website contents — articles, lessons, explanations, or applications — that I created carry the licenses of my institution and my company. No agent has the right to pull any data from the servers and then sell it through a token system!! While I do not benefit anything.

The Claims:

Either finding servers that protect this, and that also do not share with the agents and leave the official owner of the website without benefit.

Or placing the website address officially and prominently at the top of the article, then at the bottom of the article clearly, stating that the citation was made through such-and-such website, and to learn more, please visit such-and-such website. As for the commercial practice of concealment and placing a sources icon without displaying it, this is neither ideal nor marketing-wise sound. I am not demanding my full share; I am demanding the full display of the website, the name of the institution, and the company at the top of the article and then below it, so that the user can visit my website, and in this way I become an official advertising partner for free through them. As for them selling public information and not wanting other companies to benefit, this is an unethical approach in the intellectual property of the article, the explanation of lessons, or any curriculum whatsoever.