Historical component index
Example identifiers, categories, decade labels and editorial source-note status. Quarterly cadence is illustrative only.
A fictional/composite sample for a specialist data publisher: human access summary, intended-use decisions, field catalog, custom machine-readable policy, human enquiry routing and a dated change log.
The short version is readable by a buyer, an agent operator and the publisher’s reviewer. It routes ambiguous use to a person instead of silently granting or denying rights.
A composite specialist archive used only for this readiness sample.
Every request records dataset/fields, intended use, geography, users, volume, retention, attribution and start date. A publisher owner—and customer/counsel where needed—approves final terms.
Six use cases stay separate. These statuses are workflow labels in a fictional sample; they do not create legal rights.
| Intended use | Sample status | What the requester should do | What this does not mean |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ordinary human browsing | Refer to human terms | Read the publisher-approved terms. | Not a new licence from this page. |
| Search discovery / short reference | Refer to human terms | Confirm scope, attribution and limits. | Not blanket permission for bulk copying. |
| Prompt-time retrieval | Request required | Describe fields, users, volume and retention. | Not a promised API or endpoint. |
| Bulk export / API access | Request required | Ask for a scoped commercial decision. | Not proof that a bulk product is available. |
| Model training / fine-tuning | Not pre-authorized | Obtain a separate written decision. | Public visibility does not establish training rights. |
| Resale / redistribution | Not pre-authorized | Obtain a separate written decision. | No downstream rights are implied. |
The fictional catalog names two possible data products and eight example fields. Record counts are left null, and every delivery status remains enquiry_only_not_promised.
Example identifiers, categories, decade labels and editorial source-note status. Quarterly cadence is illustrative only.
Example source/candidate identifiers, evidence status and last-reviewed date. No compatibility conclusion is claimed.
Policy discovery and buyer qualification are structured, while owner and customer/counsel review remain mandatory.
A bot note or llms.txt alone is not the offer. Name the datasets, fields, intended uses and human decision path.
A custom JSON file can improve discovery and routing. It does not replace terms, grant a licence or provide legal advice.
Different use cases need distinct review states. Avoid a misleading universal “AI allowed” boolean.
Do not invent API availability, prices, record counts, rights or update guarantees merely to make the catalog look complete.
Record effective date, owner, evidence reference and review status so machine-readable copy does not silently drift from approved terms.
Three qualified publishers request a custom pack, or one publisher pays for a setup after approved distribution.
Publishers do not control a licensable product, only want a free crawler firewall, or ten approved high-specificity touches produce no commercial conversation.
Boundary: workflow and product-readiness only. No legal opinion, rights determination, contract drafting, security assessment, crawler blocking, robots enforcement, pay-per-crawl setup, API implementation, licence grant, revenue uplift or agent/crawler compliance guarantee.