Yes, a training company or course creator can license course material it owns to AI developers: video lessons with transcripts, assessments with answer keys, worked solutions and graded responses. Chegg now licenses its academic content to AI labs, and Wiley reported $49 million of AI revenue in fiscal 2026. Ownership is the first check: instructor and contractor agreements, platform terms, third-party material inside courses, and student work, which FERPA restricts where it applies.
- Developers value teaching material that shows reasoning: worked solutions, answer keys, graded responses.
- Course content made by employees belongs to the company; contractors' work needs a signed agreement.
- Teachable and Coursera learners keep ownership of what they upload, but platform terms and licenses differ.
- Student records from schools that take federal funds need consent or full de-identification under FERPA.
- No per-course price has been published; the public figures are catalogue-level and from publishers.
Can you license course content to AI companies?
Yes, if you own it. A license gives an AI developer defined rights to use a copy for training or for answering users, while you keep the course and keep selling it. The clearest public example is Chegg, which says its academic content "can be licensed to AI labs and is especially valuable for training models to develop advanced reasoning and problem-solving capabilities" (Chegg via Business Wire).
This page is for owners of training companies, online course businesses and corporate learning teams. It is general information, not legal advice; your counsel decides how the terms below apply. If you came here to learn how to sell online courses to students, this page is about a different thing: licensing course material you already have to AI developers.
What AI developers license from education and training companies
Material that shows how to reason, not only facts. Chegg points to "millions of complex, step-by-step reasoning solutions" as the core of its offer (Chegg via Business Wire). The same logic ranks a training company's records:
| Course material | What a developer uses it for | What raises value |
|---|---|---|
| Video lessons with accurate transcripts | Multimodal training on explanation and demonstration | Hundreds of hours, professional subjects, clean transcripts |
| Assessments with answer keys | Evaluation sets and reasoning practice | Items never published online, with rationales for each answer |
| Worked solutions and instructor explanations | Step-by-step reasoning data | Every step written out, reviewed for accuracy |
| Graded learner responses with feedback | Training models to grade and give feedback | Only with learner consent or full de-identification |
| Corporate and compliance training | Workplace and industry knowledge | Specialist subjects not covered by free courses |
Material that is already free or open on the web is worth little, because developers can use it without paying. Recent, specialist and paywalled material is what has value.
Who owns training materials: the company, the instructor or the platform?
It depends on who made them and under what agreement. Work "prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment" is a work made for hire, owned by the employer (17 U.S.C. 101). Course material from outside instructors is different: a commissioned work counts as made for hire only in listed categories, which include an instructional text, "as a test, as answer material for a test", and only "if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them" (17 U.S.C. 101).
| Who made it | Usual owner | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| Employees, as part of their job | The company | Employment agreements; any side agreements with star instructors |
| Contract instructors with a signed work-for-hire or assignment clause | The company | That the clause covers this course and is signed |
| Contract instructors without one | Usually the instructor | Get a written assignment or license before including the course |
| Revenue-share instructors on your platform | Usually the instructor | Your instructor terms; many grant you a license to sell, not to sublicense for AI |
| Third-party clips, images, textbook excerpts and music | Their owners | Remove, or get rights that cover AI training |
Publishers have treated authors' consent as necessary. HarperCollins' AI deal "is for a three-year period, and authors must opt in", and "provides for a $5,000 fee per book, split evenly between the author and the publisher at $2,500 each" (Publishers Weekly).
What Udemy, Coursera and Teachable say about AI training
Where your course is hosted affects what you can do and what the platform can do. Read the terms you agreed to; the summaries below are what each page said when Origin read it.
| Platform | Who owns the course | What the terms say about AI |
|---|---|---|
| Udemy | The instructor, with a license to Udemy | Udemy says it "may explore training or fine-tuning GenAI models using instructor content". Instructors who opt out are told: "We will not use your content to develop or improve any GenAI models with the exception of core capabilities." The opt-out is offered annually (Udemy) |
| Coursera | Course content is governed by agreements between Coursera and its content providers | Learners "retain all intellectual property rights" in what they submit but grant Coursera a "perpetual, sublicensable" license; users may not "develop or train" AI models on content in the services without written consent (Coursera) |
| Teachable | The creator | Creator content "is and remains Yours. Teachable does not claim any intellectual property rights over User Content" (Teachable) |
If you host on Teachable or your own site and own the content, you can usually license your own source files directly. Courses you sell on Udemy remain yours, but check whether you also opted in to Udemy's own AI program, so two licenses do not conflict.
Student work, privacy and FERPA
Learner submissions are the most restricted part. FERPA applies to "an educational agency or institution to which funds have been made available under any program administered by the Secretary" of Education (34 CFR 99.1). There, a parent or eligible student "shall provide a signed and dated written consent" before personally identifiable information from education records is disclosed (34 CFR 99.30). Records may be released without consent only "after the removal of all personally identifiable information" (34 CFR 99.31).
Most private training companies and corporate academies are not FERPA institutions, but state privacy laws and your own learner terms still apply, and work by named employees of client companies may be confidential to those clients. If learners under 13 appear in video or audio, the COPPA Rule treats their image or voice as personal information (16 CFR 312.2). The safe default: license course material, and include learner work only with consent or full de-identification.
Training license or access-only license?
A training license lets the developer use your material to change a model's weights; once trained, the use cannot be undone. An access-only (retrieval) license lets an AI product look up and quote your material when answering users, and stops when the license ends. Access-only deals keep more control and can be recurring; training deals tend to be paid once. The difference is covered in AI training vs retrieval data licenses.
How to prepare a course catalogue for AI licensing
A catalogue summary is enough for a first conversation; no files need to leave your systems.
- List courses by subject, hours of video, number of assessment items and solutions, language and year produced.
- Mark each course's author and the agreement covering it: employee, contractor with assignment, or revenue-share instructor.
- Flag third-party material inside courses: stock footage, music, textbook excerpts, licensed case studies.
- Check platform terms and any earlier AI licenses, especially exclusive ones.
- Keep transcripts, answer keys and rationales linked to the lessons they belong to.
- Separate learner submissions and decide whether they are in scope at all. See the de-identification guide.
What AI companies pay for course content: the honest evidence
No price for licensing a training company's courses has been published. The public figures come from publishers, and one from a buyer program reported second-hand.
| Evidence | What it says | Source grade |
|---|---|---|
| Wiley fiscal 2026 results | "Delivered $49 million of AI revenue (+23%)", while its Learning segment cited "lower AI licensing revenue in Academic and Professional" (Wiley) | Company results; a large publisher's total, not a per-course price |
| HarperCollins AI deal | $5,000 per book for three years, split with the author, opt-in | Named press (Publishers Weekly) |
| Chegg | Licenses academic content to AI labs; early customers include members of the "Magnificent Seven" | Company press release; no deal value disclosed |
| Mercor publisher and education listing | DDIY reports that "Mercor pays publishers and education companies $35,000 to $370,000." | Third-party guide describing a buyer's published range; Origin could not open the listing itself; a range, not a deal |
Wiley's own results show the money is uneven: its learning business reported lower AI licensing revenue in the same year its total rose. Treat any range as a ceiling, not a forecast. For buyer checks see how to vet an AI data buyer.
Does your company hold records like these? See what your data is worth.
Origin Data Partners works with companies that own data and helps get it bought. We are independent of the services on this page, and a buyer may pay us when a deal closes (how Origin is paid). See what your data is worth.
Common questions
Is this page about how to sell online courses to students?
No. This page is about licensing course material you already own, such as video lessons, transcripts, assessments and worked solutions, to AI developers who use it to train or power models. Selling courses to students through a platform or your own site is a different business with different buyers, and this page does not cover it.
Can our training company license its course videos and tests to an AI company?
Yes, for material the company owns. Work made by employees as part of their job belongs to the company. Material from contract instructors belongs to them unless a signed agreement assigns it or makes it a work made for hire. Remove third-party clips, music and textbook excerpts, and leave out learner submissions unless consented or de-identified.
Who owns training materials created by a contract instructor for our courses?
Usually the instructor, unless you have a signed agreement. Federal law treats a commissioned instructional text, test or answer material as a work made for hire only when both parties sign a written instrument saying so. Without that, get a written assignment or a license that covers AI use before including the course.
Can I license my Udemy courses to an AI company if I host them on Udemy?
You keep ownership of courses you publish on Udemy, but read the instructor terms you accepted. Udemy says it may train or fine-tune generative AI models on instructor content, and offers an annual opt-out from its GenAI program. Make sure any outside license does not conflict with Udemy's rights or an exclusive promise.
Can a corporate learning team license employee training videos to AI developers?
Possibly, but check three things first. The company must own the material, which it usually does for employee-made content. Videos must not show confidential processes, customer names or employees who did not agree. And vendor-supplied courses inside your learning system belong to the vendor, not to you.
Does FERPA stop a school or college from licensing student work to AI developers?
For institutions that receive federal education funds, FERPA requires signed and dated written consent before personally identifiable information from education records is disclosed. Records can be released without consent only after all personally identifiable information is removed. Private training companies are usually outside FERPA but still bound by privacy laws and their own terms.
How much do AI companies pay for online course content?
No per-course price has been published. Public figures come from publishers: Wiley reported $49 million of AI revenue in fiscal 2026, and HarperCollins offered $5,000 per book, split with authors. A third-party guide reports a Mercor range of $35,000 to $370,000 for publishers and education companies, which Origin could not confirm on Mercor's page.
Is there demand for an online courses dataset with transcripts and assessments?
There is demand for specialist teaching material that shows reasoning. Chegg says its step-by-step solutions can be licensed to AI labs and reports early customers among the largest technology companies. Free courses already on the web add little; recent, paywalled, specialist material with answer keys and rationales is what buyers ask about.
Sources and further reading
- Business Wire: Chegg expands into AI model training (13 May 2026)
- Wiley: fourth quarter and fiscal 2026 results
- Publishers Weekly: agents, authors question HarperCollins AI deal
- DDIY: how to sell course and publishing data to AI companies (third-party guide)
- Udemy: GenAI Program instructor FAQs
- Coursera: Terms of Use
- Teachable: Terms of Use
- 17 U.S.C. 101: definitions (architectural work, work made for hire)
- 34 CFR 99.1: which institutions FERPA applies to
- 34 CFR 99.30: when prior consent is required
- 34 CFR 99.31: when prior consent is not required (de-identified records)
- 16 CFR 312.2: COPPA Rule definitions