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

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

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

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

It simulates my chatty style of composing, however it's also a bit recurring, and very verbose. It might have exceeded Janet's triggers in looking at data about me.

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

There's likewise a mysterious, repetitive hallucination in the form of my feline (I have no pets). And there's a metaphor on practically 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 called the primary executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had offered 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 firm uses its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone developing one in any person's name, consisting of celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around content. Each book contains a printed disclaimer stating that it is imaginary, developed by AI, and developed "entirely to bring humour and pleasure".

Legally, the copyright belongs to the company, however Mr Mashiach worries that the product is planned as a "personalised gag present", and the books do not get offered even more.

He wishes to broaden his variety, producing various categories such as sci-fi, and possibly using an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted kind of consumer AI - offering AI-generated items to human clients.

It's likewise a bit frightening if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it probably took less than a minute to generate, akropolistravel.com and it does, definitely in some parts, sound similar to me.

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

"We should be clear, when we are discussing data here, we really imply human creators' life works," states Ed Newton Rex, founder of Fairly Trained, which campaigns for AI firms to respect creators' rights.

"This is books, this is articles, this is images. It's masterpieces. 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 featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social networks before being pulled from streaming platforms due to the fact that 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 although the artists were phony, it was still hugely popular.

"I do not believe the usage of generative AI for creative functions should be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without consent must be banned," Mr Newton Rex includes. "AI can be very effective but let's construct it morally 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 dents America's swagger

In the UK some organisations - including the BBC - have picked to block AI developers from trawling their online content for training functions. Others have chosen to team up - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT creator OpenAI for example.

The UK government is thinking about an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use developers' material on the internet to help develop their designs, 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, reporters 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 also highly versus removing copyright law for AI.

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

"The government is weakening among its finest performing markets on the unclear guarantee of growth."

A government representative said: "No relocation will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that provides each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to assist them accredit their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more openness for right holders from AI designers."

Under the UK federal government's new AI plan, a nationwide information library containing public data from a large range of sources will also be provided to AI researchers.

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 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 federal government before they are released.

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

This comes as a number of claims against AI firms, and especially against 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 claim that the AI companies broke the law when they took their material from the internet without their authorization, and utilized it to train their systems.

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

If this wasn't all sufficient to consider, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has shaken the sector photorum.eclat-mauve.fr over the past week. It became one of the most downloaded free app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek declares that it developed its technology for a fraction of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, and threatens American's current 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 need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the present weakness in generative AI tools for bigger jobs. It is full of errors and hallucinations, and it can be quite tough to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But given how quickly the tech is evolving, I'm uncertain how long I can remain positive that my substantially slower human writing and editing skills, are much better.

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

Outside the UK? Register here.