mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Do Data Owners Say No? A Case Study of Data Consent Mechanisms in Web-Scraped Vision-Language AI Training Datasets

arXiv 2511.08637 ↗First posted 10 Nov 2025cs.CY cs.AI cs.CRcited by 2

On the map: LLM safety and security → Watermarking generated content and models

Abstract (arXiv)

The internet has become the main source of data to train modern text-to-image or vision-language models, yet it is increasingly unclear whether web-scale data collection practices for training AI systems adequately respect data owners' wishes. Ignoring the owner's indication of consent around data usage not only raises ethical concerns but also has recently been elevated into lawsuits around copyright infringement cases. In this work, we aim to reveal information about data owners' consent to AI scraping and training, and study how it's expressed in DataComp, a popular dataset of 12.8 billion text-image pairs. We examine both the sample-level information, including the copyright notice, watermarking, and metadata, and the web-domain-level information, such as a site's Terms of Service (ToS) and Robots Exclusion Protocol. We estimate at least 122M of samples exhibit some indication of copyright notice in CommonPool, and find that 60% of the samples in the top 50 domains come from websites with ToS that prohibit scraping. Furthermore, we estimate 9-13% with 95% confidence interval of samples from CommonPool to contain watermarks, where existing watermark detection methods fail to capture them in high fidelity. Our holistic methods and findings show that data owners rely on various channels to convey data consent, of which current AI data collection pipelines do not entirely respect. These findings highlight the limitations of the current dataset curation/release practice and the need for a unified data consent framework taking AI purposes into consideration.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Watermarking generated content and models, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 18 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Nov 2025.

Builds on

18 of 42 references.

References · 18

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,863
  3. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  4. 2022Photorealistic Text-to-Image Diffusion Models with Deep Language Understandingcited by 6,355
  5. 2021Zero-Shot Text-to-Image Generationcited by 4,288
  6. 2022LAION-5B: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text modelscited by 4,152
  7. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  8. 2016Bag of Tricks for Efficient Text Classificationcited by 876
  9. 2023DataComp: In search of the next generation of multimodal datasetscited by 644
  10. 2021Documenting Large Webtext Corpora: A Case Study on the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpuscited by 492
  11. 2024Dolma: an Open Corpus of Three Trillion Tokens for Language Model Pretraining Researchcited by 483
  12. 2023Poisoning Web-Scale Training Datasets is Practicalcited by 290
6 more
  1. 2022Separable Self-attention for Mobile Vision Transformerscited by 163
  2. 2023What's In My Big Data?cited by 129
  3. 2024Consent in Crisis: The Rapid Decline of the AI Data Commonscited by 46
  4. 2024Who's in and who's out? A case study of multimodal CLIP-filtering in DataCompcited by 15
  5. 2025Governance of Generative AI in Creative Work: Consent, Credit, Compensation, and Beyondcited by 13
  6. 2025A Common Pool of Privacy Problems: Legal and Technical Lessons from a Large-Scale Web-Scraped Machine Learning Datasetcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Privacy and Copyright Protection in Generative AI: A Lifecycle Perspective
  2. 2025TEDI: Trustworthy and Ethical Dataset Indicators to Analyze and Compare Dataset Documentation
  3. 2025Neglected Risks: The Disturbing Reality of Children's Images in Datasets and the Urgent Call for Accountability
  4. 2025Rethinking Data Protection in the (Generative) Artificial Intelligence Era
  5. 2024Uncertain Boundaries: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Copyright Issues in Generative AI
  6. 2025Copyright Infringement Risk Reduction via Chain-of-Thought and Task Instruction Prompting
  7. 2026Position: No Retroactive Cure for Infringement during Training
  8. 2024Data Defenses Against Large Language Models