Data brokers and referral fees for AI data deals

Short answer

Company data reaches AI developers in four main ways: a direct licence with the developer, a sale or licence to a data vendor that repackages it, a listing on a marketplace, or an introduction by a broker. Each route is paid differently, and intermediaries are often paid by the buyer as well as, or instead of, the seller. That is not unlawful in itself, but a seller cannot judge an offer without knowing who pays whom, how much and for what. Ask for written disclosure of every fee before signing anything, and compare offers on what the company keeps, not on the headline price.

Four ways data reaches a buyer

The simplest is a direct licence: the company negotiates with the AI developer and signs a licence with it. It usually yields the best price and the most control over terms, but it requires access to the buyer and the time to negotiate with a much larger counterparty.

The second route is a data vendor. Some companies buy or license datasets, clean, label or combine them, and license the result to developers. The company deals with one counterparty, which takes the commercial risk; in exchange it typically receives less, and its data travels further from its control. The vendor's terms with its own customers decide what eventually happens to the data.

Third, marketplaces and platforms bring many sellers and buyers together and take a commission or a listing fee. Under the EU Data Governance Act, a service that aims to establish commercial relationships for data sharing between an undetermined number of data holders and data users is a data intermediation service. Its provider must notify the competent authority, may not use the data it intermediates for any other purpose than to put them at the disposal of data users, must provide the service through a separate legal person, and may not make its pricing depend on whether customers use its other services. Services that acquire data, add substantial value and license the result without bringing the two sides into a commercial relationship fall outside that definition.

Fourth, brokers and finders introduce sellers to buyers in exchange for a fee, usually only if a deal closes. Referral fees, sometimes called bounties, are also offered for introductions; in October 2026, for example, a company that supplies training data to AI developers was publicly reported to offer referral bounties for introductions to businesses willing to license their data. The same intermediary may therefore be paid by the seller, by the buyer, or by both.

When the intermediary is paid by both sides

An intermediary paid by the buyer has an interest in the deal closing, not necessarily in the seller's price. An intermediary paid by both sides has an interest in the deal closing at a price both will accept, which is a different thing from the best price for the seller. This does not make every such arrangement improper; it means the seller must know about it in order to weigh the advice it receives.

Greek law offers some reference points. Under the Civil Code, whoever promised a broker a fee for mediation, or for pointing out an opportunity to conclude a contract, owes it only if the contract is concluded as a result of that mediation or indication. Where the intermediary acts for the company under a mandate, it must hand over to the company whatever it received in carrying out the mandate. A payment from the buyer to someone who is formally the seller's agent therefore raises an immediate question under that rule, and is a matter to settle expressly in writing.

Why written fee disclosure matters

Before engaging an intermediary, and in any case before signing a licence it has arranged, the company should have in writing the information below. A reputable intermediary will provide it without difficulty; reluctance is itself an answer.

Every payment the intermediary will receive in connection with the deal, from the company, from the buyer or from anyone else, with amount or formula.
Whether the intermediary acts for the company, for the buyer, or for neither, and whether it has an ongoing relationship with the buyer.
Whether its fee is owed only if a deal closes, and whether it continues on renewals, extensions or later deals with the same buyer.
What the intermediary itself may do with the data or samples it receives, and an undertaking to delete them.
Whether exclusivity is requested, for how long, and what happens to buyers it introduced after the mandate ends.

How to compare offers

Offers in this market rarely look alike, and the headline figure is a poor guide. A useful method is to reduce each offer to the same few questions. What will the company actually receive, after every fee and commission, and when? How much of it is guaranteed and how much depends on the buyer's future revenue or milestones? What exclusivity does the offer demand, and what does that cost in other licences the company can no longer grant? What does the buyer get to keep after the term ends: the raw data, derived datasets, trained models? What warranties and liability does the company take on, and up to what amount? And who is the counterparty, how solid is it, and in which country and under which law would the company have to enforce payment?

A lower offer with a guaranteed payment, a narrow field of use and a firm deletion obligation is often worth more than a higher one built on revenue share, broad exclusivity and open-ended warranties. Our page on licence terms explains each of these elements.

Practical precautions

Sign a confidentiality agreement with any intermediary before sharing descriptions of the data, and an evaluation agreement before sharing samples. Keep a record of what was sent to whom. Do not grant an intermediary exclusive authority to market the data unless the period is short and the obligations on the intermediary are concrete. Where a marketplace is involved, check whether it presents itself as a data intermediation service and has notified a competent authority, and read its standard terms on how long listed data stays on its systems. And before the first conversation, settle internally which data is actually available to license, as described on our page on what the company owns.

Questions clients ask

Is it lawful for a broker to take a fee from both seller and buyer?

Not as such, but it has consequences. Under the Greek Civil Code a broker loses its fee and expenses if, contrary to its agreement, it also acted for the other side, or accepted a promise of a fee from the other side in circumstances contrary to good faith. An intermediary acting for the company under a mandate must also hand over what it receives in carrying it out. Insist on written disclosure and settle the point in the engagement terms.

Do we owe the broker a fee if the deal falls through?

Under the Greek Civil Code a brokerage fee is owed only if the contract is concluded as a result of the broker's mediation or indication; if only a preliminary contract was signed and the final contract fell through, half the fee is owed. Expenses are reimbursed only if that was agreed. The engagement letter can change the economics, so read it before signing.

Is a marketplace safer than a broker?

Not necessarily. A marketplace that intermediates between many sellers and buyers is subject to neutrality conditions under the Data Governance Act, but its standard terms still govern listing, commissions and what happens to the data. Read them as closely as any licence.

Sources

This page is general information, not legal advice; the answer in any real case depends on its facts and documents.

L+A advises Greek companies on data protection, data licensing and the regulation of artificial intelligence.

Send us your question

Tell us about your case. A lawyer of the firm will reply by email.

Your message goes only to the lawyers of the firm and is used only to reply to you. You may write in Greek or English.

An intermediary has offered to find a buyer for our data. How does this market pay, and what should we watch for?