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

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

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a few basic prompts about me supplied by my buddy Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty design of composing, but it's likewise a bit repeated, and very verbose. It may have surpassed Janet's prompts in collecting information about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repetitive hallucination in the type of my feline (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on almost every page - some more random than others.

There are lots of business 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 personalised books, primarily in the US, considering that rotating from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

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

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

There is presently no barrier to anyone developing one in anybody's name, consisting of celebs - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive content. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, fishtanklive.wiki created by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and happiness".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the firm, however Mr Mashiach worries that the item is meant as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He intends to widen his variety, generating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps offering an autobiography service. It's designed to be a form of consumer AI - offering AI-generated goods to human clients.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least because it probably took less than a minute to create, and it does, certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We must be clear, when we are discussing data here, we in fact mean human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is photos. It's artworks. It's records ... The whole point of AI training is to learn how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a song featuring 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 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 making use of generative AI for innovative functions should be prohibited, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without approval need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really effective but let's develop it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing its work for vmeste-so-vsemi.ru their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

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

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

The UK federal government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would enable AI developers to utilize creators' content on the internet to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders pull out.

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He points out that AI can make advances in areas 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 ruining the livelihoods of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in your house of Lords, is also strongly versus removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The federal government is undermining one of its finest carrying out industries on the unclear promise of development."

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

Under the UK federal government's brand-new AI plan, a national information library including public information from a vast array of sources will likewise be provided to AI scientists.

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

But this has now been rescinded by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to desire the AI sector to deal with less policy.

This comes as a number of claims versus AI companies, and especially versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out 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 internet without their approval, and utilized 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 elements which can constitute reasonable 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 need to be paying for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion of the cost of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has actually raised security issues 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 want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weak point in generative AI tools for bigger projects. It is full of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to read in parts due to the fact that it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm unsure for how long I can remain positive that my considerably slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.