Open web vs AI: what can W3C do?
The W3C held a breakout session to discuss threats to the open web posed by AI, particularly large language model crawlers straining website infrastructure and shifting content consumption away from traditional browsing. While some argue the web does not need saving, others highlight concerns over value extraction by AI companies and the need for fair compensation and open standards. Suggestions include increasing AI company engagement in W3C standards, bridging content creators and AI developers, and ensuring the 'agentic web' remains open and accessible.
- ▪LLM crawlers are placing significant strain on website servers, comparable to DDOS attacks, affecting sites from personal blogs to Wikipedia.
- ▪Content creators are concerned about AI systems consuming and repurposing their content without fair compensation or attribution.
- ▪The SPUR Coalition and IETF's AI Preferences group are developing standards to address responsible use of journalistic content and user preferences in AI interactions.
- ▪Some participants argue that AI agents could be considered modern Web User Agents, assisting users in navigating the complex web landscape.
- ▪W3C is exploring ways to ensure the 'agentic web' is built on open standards and principles rather than proprietary, closed systems.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Open web vs AI: what can W3C do? Published 2026-04-28 in category: ai by Hidde de Vries At last week’s W3C Advisory Committee meeting, I ran a breakout session on what to do about threats to the open web. We had an interesting conversation. Many interesting points were raised, and some disagreed the web needs saving at all. Disclosure: as the breakout was part of a Member-confidential event, I generalised and synthesised what was raised, and left out attributions to specific individuals, except where I explicitly asked permission (Members can view the minutes). Wait, what threats? Indeed, this session was inspired by earlier sessions at W3C and IETF.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Hidde's blog.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Hidde's blog
