For Christmas I got an intriguing gift from a pal - my very own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was completely written by AI, with a few easy triggers about me supplied by my pal Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, but it's also a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's triggers in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated hallucination in the type 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 business online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I got in touch with the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, oke.zone he told me he had offered around 150,000 customised books, primarily in the US, because 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 generate them, based on an open source big language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone developing one in anyone's name, consisting of stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, created by AI, and created "solely to bring humour and happiness".

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

He hopes to widen his variety, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human customers.

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

Musicians, authors, artists and stars worldwide have actually expressed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then produce similar content based upon it.

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we actually suggest human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, wikibase.imfd.cl which campaigns for AI firms to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is pictures. It's works of art. 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 singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms since it was not their work and they had actually not granted it. It didn't stop the track's creator attempting to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not think the use of generative AI for imaginative functions need to be prohibited, however I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without permission need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful however let's develop it morally and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors using 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 actually selected to block AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have actually decided to team up - the Financial Times has partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "insanity".

He explains that AI can make advances in locations 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 ruining the incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

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

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

"The federal government is undermining among its finest carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of growth."

A government spokesperson said: "No relocation will be made up until we are definitely positive we have a practical strategy that delivers each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them license their content, access to premium material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library including public data from a wide variety of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

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 safety 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 now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is said to desire the AI sector to face less guideline.

This comes as a variety of lawsuits versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everybody from the New York Times to authors, yewiki.org music labels, and even a comic.

They claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the web without their authorization, and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair use" and are for that reason exempt. There are a number of elements which can make up fair use - it's not a straight-forward meaning. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it collects training information and whether it ought to be paying for it.

If this wasn't all adequate to ponder, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the past week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

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

As for me and a career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I really want a "bestseller" I'll still have to compose it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for akropolistravel.com larger tasks. It has plenty of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather tough to check out in parts because it's so verbose.

But given how rapidly the tech is developing, I'm not sure the length of time I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and modifying skills, are much better.

Register for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in international innovation, with analysis from BBC reporters around the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.