Every reader gets their own words.
Each paywalled article carries invisible canary phrases, a little different for every visitor. When an AI answer repeats one, it points back to the one session that read it. Try it with a sentence from your own site.
Your three readers will appear here: sessions A, B and C, each served a slightly different sentence. Then a sample answer engine quotes one of them.
What counts, and what never does.
Only a real lock that was picked counts. Your lawyer decides what to file; Gatecrash keeps the record.
What goes in the record
- A real access control got around.
A JS challenge, a CAPTCHA or a login that a session dodged to reach the text.
- A canary that came back.
A phrase only that session was served, found in an answer engine or AI search reply.
- An actor named by more than its label.
Network, canary and behaviour together, because user agents are easy to forge.
What we never do
- Claim robots.txt alone.
A court called it a keep-off-the-grass sign, not an access control (Ziff Davis v. OpenAI, S.D.N.Y., December 2025).
- Set bait.
Canaries sit in your normal articles and are disclosed in your terms. No pages built to invite a break-in.
- Send demands or share a recovery.
Your own litigation counsel decides whether to write or sue, and signs everything. Gatecrash never contacts AI companies.
The pack your counsel opens.
Each month: every act of circumvention, the session behind it, how the lock was picked, the network, the canary and where it surfaced. A chain of custody runs through all of it.
$200 to $2,500 per act, if a court agrees.
That is the statutory range under 17 U.S.C. §1203(c)(3)(A), and §1203(b)(5) lets the court award reasonable attorney’s fees. In Reddit v. SerpApi (S.D.N.Y., 31 July 2026) circumvention claims against a scraper were allowed to go ahead. The law here is new and rulings point both ways: whether an act counts is for a court to decide.
Evidence pack, October 2026Sample rows
| Exhibit | Date (UTC) | Session | Lock picked | Network | Canary | Surfaced in |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GC-000214 | 14 Oct, 09:12 | 7f3a-91c2 | JS challenge, headless browser | AS64512 | slow leak in a full tank | Answer engine reply |
| GC-000215 | 14 Oct, 11:40 | c04e-17ab | CAPTCHA solved by a service | AS64513 | held back bookings | AI search API |
| GC-000216 | 15 Oct, 02:05 | 9be1-60d4 | Login wall, reused cookie | AS64512 | third straight week | Answer engine reply |
Two ways to pay.
For publishers with a real paywall or login, and no proof yet of who gets past it.
Evidence plan
$2,500a month per publisher
- A JS challenge and metered paywall that keep forensic logs
- Canary phrases in your protected text, different for every session
- A daily probe of the big answer engines and AI search APIs
- A monthly evidence pack with its chain of custody
Litigation-grade report
$15,000once
One report for one matter, built for your counsel, with support for your expert’s declaration. A human forensic expert reviews the method; their pay never depends on the outcome.
Ask about a reportYour counsel is retained and paid by you. Gatecrash never takes a share of a legal fee or of anything you recover.
Is AI quoting your paywall?
Paste up to five paywalled article URLs. When the probe opens you get a same-day report on whether answer engines reproduce their text. It’s free, and nobody is contacted on your behalf.