Individually assessed compensation; engagement terms vary. 30+ staff; mature operations; mainly English; US prioritized. Confirm the final scope and acceptance terms before providing records.
This profile checks the public program and its stated terms. It does not authenticate a particular sender, audit completed deals, or certify security practices. No owner rating or paid-outcome estimate is assigned.
How evidence is checked · Commercial disclosureWhat is micro1’s company-data program?
micro1's enterprise program compensates companies for operational knowledge used to train and evaluate AI. It emphasizes documented workflows, decision-making and potentially continuing participation. Official program ↗
Who is the counterparty?
micro1 is categorized here as direct licensing. This describes the published route, not necessarily the entity that trains an AI model. Confirm the contracting company, its authority to license the records and the ultimate permitted recipients. A real company can still be impersonated; reach its program through the official source linked here.
Which records does it describe?
SOPs and playbooks, Internal knowledge bases, CRM records, Project histories, QA and process documentation, Business feedback on AI outputs. Official program ↗
What does that mean for your archive?
Map these categories to the systems and date ranges your company actually retains. Include linked decisions and outcomes where available, but identify customer restrictions, personal information, third-party content and privileged material separately. A match with a listed category is a reason to ask about eligibility, not approval to send an export.
Which companies may qualify?
Operationally mature companies with 30+ employees and established documentation. micro1 prioritizes US companies, then other Western markets, and primarily seeks English-language operations and documentation. Official program ↗
How much does micro1 publish?
$100K+, $500K+ and $1M+ advertised partnership tiers (provider marketing tiers). Official program ↗
How should you interpret that figure?
Published bands, illustrative calculators and quoted examples are different types of evidence. None is a guaranteed price for your company. Where no range has been verified, do not fill the gap with another provider’s estimate. Request a written proposal identifying the records, rights, deductions and conditions behind the amount.
When and how is payment described?
Individually evaluated compensation based on quality, volume, complexity and uniqueness. The public program does not state a universal payment schedule or fixed revenue split. Official program ↗
What does this business model mean for an owner?
A stated licensing program does not make every submission payable. Ask which milestone creates the payment obligation, who decides acceptance, how a rejected dataset is handled, and whether exclusivity starts before any money is due.
Which evidence is available, and what is still open?
These labels describe disclosure, not quality scores. “Verify in writing” means this review does not establish the term for your transaction.
| Criterion | Evidence status | Owner check |
|---|---|---|
| Program identity | Official source linked | Use the provider’s own domain to verify the sender and contracting entity. |
| Record fit | Categories described | SOPs and playbooks, Internal knowledge bases, CRM records. Ask for a bounded scope. |
| Eligibility | Published description | Operationally mature companies with 30+ employees and established documentation. micro1 prioritizes US companies, then other Western markets, and primarily seeks English-language operations and documentation. |
| Price visibility | Attributed public claim | $100K+, $500K+ and $1M+ advertised partnership tiers (provider marketing tiers) |
| Payment mechanics | Published description | Individually evaluated compensation based on quality, volume, complexity and uniqueness. The public program does not state a universal payment schedule or fixed revenue split. |
| Exclusivity and downstream rights | Verify in writing | Confirm duration, permitted uses, sublicensing and whether competing licenses are allowed. |
| Acceptance and deletion | Verify in writing | Specify rejection rules, access expiry, retention and deletion of samples and rejected records. |
What is not yet established?
- Participation, retention, deletion and review obligations depend on the engagement.
- Confirm whether the proposed deal is a single delivery or requires ongoing work; advertised compensation tiers are not offers.
How should you start the conversation?
Begin with a non-sensitive description of your company, systems, approximate history and record categories. Ask for the legal entity name and proposed use before providing samples. Use a separately scoped sample with agreed handling terms; a request for broad administrator access deserves a specific explanation and a limited-access alternative.
Questions to resolve before signing
- Which exact records and time periods are included, and which are excluded?
- Who accepts the data, using what test, and by what deadline?
- What amount reaches us after fees and costs, and when is it due?
- Which customers or labs may receive copies, and for which uses?
- Can we license the same records elsewhere, and what happens if no buyer is found?
- How are samples, rejected records and retained copies deleted or restricted?
Which alternatives are worth comparing?
These are comparison routes, not ranked recommendations. Similar program models come first; eligibility and current demand can still differ. Compare the same record scope with each provider.
| Provider / model | Payment | Published figure | Fit to investigate |
|---|---|---|---|
| micro1Direct licensing | Individually assessed compensation; engagement terms vary | $100K+, $500K+ and $1M+ advertised partnership tiersprovider marketing tiers | 30+ staff; mature operations; mainly English; US prioritized Source ↗ |
| NyneDirect licensing | After dataset delivery and acceptance, under the agreement | $42,068–$98,500 calculator example: 100 staff, 10 yearscalculator example; not an offer | 20+ US W-2 staff and 3+ years of operational workflows Source ↗ |
| ScrimdataDirect licensing | Price agreed after assessment; payout milestones unpublished | Not publicly verified | Operating businesses, wind-downs, exits and pivots Source ↗ |
| AppenDirect licensing | Negotiated fee on acceptance; preparation costs covered | Not publicly verified | Enterprises with operational history; wind-downs considered Source ↗ |
| CorpusDirect licensing | On delivery confirmation; larger deals may use tranches | $100K–$2M+ across published company-size bandsprovider-reported engagement ranges | Enterprise archives; published size examples start at 25 staff Source ↗ |
See all 25 providers side by side · Read the detailed two-provider comparisons
Have a proposal from micro1?
Record the amount, scope, payment trigger and open terms in the local comparison worksheet. It organizes the information you enter; it does not value your archive, contact providers or publish individual offers.
Sources & further reading
Provider statements are attributed claims, not audited outcomes. Reviewed 19 October 2026.