For Christmas I got a fascinating gift from a friend - my really own "best-selling" book.

"Tech-Splaining for Dummies" (excellent title) bears my name and my picture on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a few basic prompts about me supplied by my friend Janet.

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

It mimics my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repetitive, and really verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's prompts in looking at data about me.

Several sentences begin "as a leading technology reporter ..." - cringe - which could have been scraped from an online bio.

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

There are lots 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 told me he had actually offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily 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 expenses ₤ 26. The company uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone producing one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, created by AI, and developed "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, but Mr Mashiach stresses that the product is intended as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wants to expand his variety, photorum.eclat-mauve.fr creating various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated products to human clients.

It's also a bit frightening if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to 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 need to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we really suggest human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is short articles, this is pictures. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out how to do something and after that do more like that."

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

"I do not think making use of generative AI for imaginative purposes should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very powerful but let's construct it morally and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

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

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have picked to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to collaborate - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

The UK federal government is thinking about an of the law that would allow AI designers to use creators' material on the internet to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders opt out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

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

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

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also highly against eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and an entire lot of happiness," says the Baroness, who is likewise a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is weakening one of its finest performing markets on the unclear promise of growth."

A federal government representative stated: "No relocation will be made until we are definitely confident we have a useful strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for best holders to assist them license their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

Under the UK government's brand-new AI plan, a nationwide information library containing public data from a large range of sources will likewise be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal rules 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 boost the security of AI with, among other things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less regulation.

This comes as a number of lawsuits against AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been gotten by everybody from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They claim that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the web without their consent, and used it to train their systems.

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

If this wasn't all adequate to consider, 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 declares that it established its technology for a portion of the cost of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present supremacy of the sector.

As for me and a profession as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for larger tasks. It has plenty of inaccuracies and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to read in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure how long I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and modifying skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the most significant developments in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC reporters all over the world.

Outside the UK? Register here.