For Christmas I received a fascinating gift from a pal - my really own "very popular" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (fantastic title) bears my name and my photo on its cover, and it has radiant reviews.

Yet it was totally written by AI, with a couple of basic triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

It's an intriguing read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, and is someplace in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty design of writing, but it's likewise a bit recurring, and really verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

Several sentences start "as a leading technology journalist ..." - cringe - which might have been scraped from an online bio.

There's also a mysterious, repeated hallucination in the type of my cat (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on nearly every page - some more random than others.

There are dozens of companies online offering AI-book composing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, since pivoting from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The company utilizes its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source big language model.

I'm not asking you to buy my book. Actually you can't - just Janet, who developed it, can buy any further copies.

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in any person's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, produced by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the item is meant as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered even more.

He wishes to widen his range, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly offering an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human consumers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you write for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound just like me.

Musicians, authors, artists and actors worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being used to train generative AI tools that then produce comparable material based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we actually imply human developers' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to respect developers' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is images. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media before being pulled from streaming platforms since it was not their work and they had not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And although the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for creative purposes must be banned, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on people's work without permission must be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be very effective but let's build it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes market and damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually picked to block AI designers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have actually decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to utilize developers' material on the web to help establish their models, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "insanity".

He mentions that AI can make advances in locations like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, journalists and artists.

"All of these things work without going and changing copyright law and destroying the incomes of the nation's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is also highly against getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of delight," states the Baroness, who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining one of its best carrying out industries on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to help them certify their material, access to top quality material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a national information library containing public information from a wide variety of sources will likewise be offered to AI scientists.

In the US the future of federal guidelines to control AI is now up in the air following President Trump's go back to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to enhance the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector required to share information of the functions of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, wiki.rrtn.org however he is stated to want the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a number of suits versus AI companies, and particularly against OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comic.

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their permission, and utilized it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable use" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of factors which can make up - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training data and whether it ought to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It became the many downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing dominance of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weak point in generative AI tools for larger jobs. It has plenty of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But provided how quickly the tech is developing, I'm not sure how long I can remain positive that my substantially slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Register here.