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 picture on its cover, and it has radiant evaluations.

Yet it was totally composed by AI, with a couple of basic prompts about me provided by my buddy Janet.

It's an intriguing read, and very amusing in parts. But it also meanders quite a lot, and is someplace in between a self-help book and a stream of anecdotes.

It mimics my chatty style of composing, however it's also a bit repeated, and really verbose. It may have exceeded Janet's prompts in collating information about me.

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

There's also a mystical, repeated hallucination in the form 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 chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually sold around 150,000 customised books, mainly in the US, since pivoting 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 upon an open source large language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anybody producing one in any person's name, including stars - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book consists of a printed disclaimer specifying that it is fictional, produced by AI, and created "exclusively to bring humour and happiness".

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

He hopes to broaden his variety, producing various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - offering AI-generated items to human customers.

It's likewise a bit scary if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least because 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 e.bike.free.fr actors worldwide have revealed alarm about their work being utilized to train generative AI tools that then churn out similar content based upon it.

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

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

In 2023 a tune featuring AI-generated voices of Canadian singers 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 granted it. It didn't stop the track's developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were fake, it was still extremely popular.

"I do not think making use of generative AI for imaginative purposes must be banned, but I do think that generative AI for these purposes that is trained on people's work without authorization should be prohibited," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be extremely effective but let's develop it morally and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese competitors utilizing its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

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

In the UK some organisations - consisting of the BBC - have actually picked to obstruct AI designers from trawling their online material for training functions. Others have decided to work together - the Financial Times has actually partnered with ChatGPT developer OpenAI for instance.

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

Ed Newton Rex explains this as "madness".

He mentions that AI can make advances in locations 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 nation's creatives," he argues.

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

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

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

A federal government representative said: "No move will be made till we are absolutely positive we have a practical strategy that provides each of our goals: increased control for ideal holders to help them certify their content, access to high-quality product to train leading AI models in the UK, and more transparency for right holders from AI developers."

Under the UK government's new AI strategy, a nationwide information library consisting of public information from a wide range of sources will also be provided to AI researchers.

In the US the future of federal rules to manage 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 enhance the safety of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector required to share information of the functions of their systems with the US federal government before they are launched.

But this has now been repealed by Trump. It remains to be seen what Trump will do rather, but he is stated to want the AI sector to deal with less regulation.

This comes as a number of claims versus AI firms, and particularly versus OpenAI, continue in the US. They have been taken out by everyone from the New York Times to authors, music labels, and even a comedian.

They declare that the AI firms broke the law when they took their content from the internet without their permission, and shiapedia.1god.org utilized 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 make up reasonable usage - it's not a straight-forward definition. But the AI sector is under increasing analysis over how it collects training data and whether it need to be spending for it.

If this wasn't all enough to contemplate, Chinese AI company DeepSeek has actually shaken the sector over the past week. It became the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it its innovation 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 career as an author, I think that at the moment, if I actually desire 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 bigger tasks. It is complete of errors and hallucinations, and it can be rather difficult to read in parts since it's so verbose.

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

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

Outside the UK? Register here.