For Christmas I received a fascinating present from a good friend - my really own "best-selling" book.

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

Yet it was entirely composed by AI, with a few easy prompts about me supplied by my good friend Janet.

It's a fascinating read, and uproarious in parts. But it likewise meanders quite a lot, wiki.vifm.info and is somewhere between a self-help book and forum.pinoo.com.tr a stream of anecdotes.

It imitates my chatty style of composing, however it's likewise a bit repetitive, and extremely verbose. It may have gone beyond Janet's triggers in collating data about me.

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

There's also a strange, repetitive hallucination in the type of my cat (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 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 customised 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 expenses ₤ 26. The firm uses its own AI tools to generate them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone producing one in anyone's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach states there are guardrails around violent material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer stating that it is fictional, developed by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and delight".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, but Mr Mashiach worries that the product is intended as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get sold even more.

He wants to widen his range, producing different categories such as sci-fi, and maybe using an autobiography service. It's developed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - offering AI-generated items to human customers.

It's also a bit scary if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least due to the fact that it most likely took less than a minute to generate, and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We ought to be clear, when we are speaking about information here, we really indicate human developers' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI firms to regard developers' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is photos. It's masterpieces. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to find out 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 media before being pulled from streaming platforms because it was not their work and they had not consented to it. It didn't stop the track's developer trying to nominate it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not believe using 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 approval should be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely effective but let's construct it ethically and fairly."

OpenAI states Chinese rivals utilizing its work for 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 - including the BBC - have picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online content for training purposes. Others have actually decided 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 permit AI developers to use creators' material on the web to assist establish their models, unless the rights holders opt 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 incomes of the country's creatives," he argues.

Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, is likewise highly against removing copyright law for AI.

"Creative industries are wealth developers, 2.4 million jobs and a lot of delight," states 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 vague guarantee of growth."

A government representative stated: "No move will be made until we are definitely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for best holders to help them accredit their material, access to premium material to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for best holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide data library containing public data from a vast array of sources will also be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal guidelines 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, to name a few things, companies in the sector needed to share information of the operations of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do instead, but he is stated to want the AI sector to face less guideline.

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

They declare 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 "fair use" and are therefore exempt. There are a variety of aspects which can make up reasonable use - it's not a straight-forward definition. 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 adequate to consider, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It became the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it established its innovation for a fraction of the price of the similarity OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

As for me and yewiki.org a profession as an author, I believe that at the moment, 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 larger projects. It has lots of mistakes and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to read in parts because it's so long-winded.

But given how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not sure for how long I can remain positive that my significantly slower human writing and modifying abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the greatest advancements in global technology, with analysis from BBC reporters around the globe.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.