For Christmas I got a fascinating present from a buddy - my very 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 completely written by AI, with a few basic prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

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

It simulates my chatty style of composing, but it's also a bit recurring, and extremely verbose. It might have gone beyond Janet's prompts in collating data about me.

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

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

There are dozens of business online offering AI-book writing services. My book was from BookByAnyone.

When I contacted the president Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he informed me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, since rotating from assembling 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 upon an open source big language design.

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

There is presently no barrier to anybody creating one in any person's name, dokuwiki.stream including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is imaginary, created by AI, and developed "solely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright comes from the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is meant as a "personalised gag gift", and the books do not get offered further.

He intends to broaden his variety, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's created to be a light-hearted kind of customer AI - selling AI-generated goods to human clients.

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

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

"We must be clear, when we are speaking about data here, we really imply human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder 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 entire point of AI training is to learn how to do something and then do more like that."

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

"I do not think the usage of generative AI for imaginative purposes ought to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without consent need to be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely effective but let's build it fairly and relatively."

OpenAI states 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 damages America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have selected to block AI developers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have chosen to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

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 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 removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth developers, 2.4 million tasks and an entire lot of happiness," states the Baroness, who is also an advisor to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

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

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

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

In the US the future of federal guidelines to manage 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 improve the safety of AI with, to name a few things, firms in the sector needed to share details of the operations of their systems with the US government before they are launched.

But this has actually now been reversed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, however he is said to want the AI sector to deal with less guideline.

This comes as a number of claims against AI companies, and especially against 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 companies broke the law when they took their content from the web without their approval, and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "reasonable usage" and are for that reason exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can constitute reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing scrutiny over how it gathers training information and whether it must be spending for it.

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

DeepSeek claims that it established its technology for a portion of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security concerns in the US, and threatens American's current dominance of the sector.

When it comes to me and a profession as an author, I think that at the minute, if I actually want a "bestseller" I'll still have to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the existing weakness in generative AI tools for bigger jobs. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be quite hard to read in parts due to the fact that it's so long-winded.

But offered how quickly the tech is progressing, I'm not sure the length of time I can stay confident that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.