For Christmas I received an intriguing present from a pal - my extremely own "very popular" book.

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

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a couple of easy triggers about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit recurring, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

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

There's likewise a strange, repeated hallucination in the kind of my feline (I have no animals). And there's a metaphor on almost 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 chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had sold around 150,000 customised books, generally in the US, because rotating from putting together 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 produce them, based on an open source large language design.

I'm not asking you to purchase my book. Actually you can't - only Janet, who created it, can purchase any further copies.

There is presently no barrier to anybody developing one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, developed by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is meant as a "customised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He intends to widen his variety, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted type of consumer AI - selling AI-generated products to human customers.

It's likewise a bit terrifying if, fakenews.win like me, you write for a living. Not least because it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We need to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we really mean human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's works of art. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to learn 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 consented to it. It didn't stop the track's creator trying to choose it for a Grammy award. And despite the fact that the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe using generative AI for innovative functions ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval should be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective however let's build it ethically and relatively."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

China's DeepSeek AI shakes industry and greyhawkonline.com damages America's swagger

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

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI designers to use creators' material on the web to assist establish their designs, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He explains that AI can make advances in areas like defence, healthcare and logistics without trawling the work of authors, reporters and artists.

"All of these things work without going and altering copyright law and destroying the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your home of Lords, is also highly versus getting rid of copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth creators, 2.4 million jobs and a great deal of joy," says the Baroness, who is likewise an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining one of its best performing markets on the vague pledge of development."

A government spokesperson stated: "No move will be made up until we are absolutely positive we have a useful strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for best holders to help them license their material, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for ideal holders from AI designers."

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

In the US the future of federal rules to manage AI is now up in the air following President Trump's return to the presidency.

In 2023 Biden signed an executive order that aimed to increase the security of AI with, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the workings 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, but he is stated to want the AI sector to deal with less regulation.

This comes as a variety of lawsuits against AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have actually been taken out by everybody from the New york city 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 approval, and used it to train their systems.

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

If this wasn't all sufficient to contemplate, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the past week. It became the a lot of downloaded totally free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's present dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I believe that at the minute, if I really desire a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite difficult to check out in parts since it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm uncertain the length of time I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and modifying skills, are better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in global innovation, with analysis from BBC correspondents worldwide.

Outside the UK? Register here.