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

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

Yet it was entirely written by AI, with a few basic triggers about me provided by my pal Janet.

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

It imitates my chatty style of composing, but it's also 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 technology reporter ..." - cringe - which might have been scraped from an online bio.

There's likewise a mystical, repeated hallucination in the form of my cat (I have no family pets). And there's a metaphor on nearly 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 got in touch with the chief executive Adir Mashiach, based in Israel, he told me he had actually sold around 150,000 personalised books, generally in the US, given that pivoting from compiling AI-generated travel guides in June 2024.

A paperback copy of your own 240-page long best-seller costs ₤ 26. The firm utilizes its own AI tools to create them, based on an open source large language model.

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

There is currently no barrier to anyone developing one in any person's name, including celebrities - although Mr Mashiach says there are guardrails around abusive material. Each book includes a printed disclaimer mentioning that it is imaginary, created by AI, and designed "solely to bring humour and joy".

Legally, the copyright comes from the firm, however Mr Mashiach stresses that the item is planned as a "customised gag present", and the books do not get offered further.

He hopes to expand his variety, creating various genres such as sci-fi, and perhaps providing an autobiography service. It's designed to be a light-hearted type of customer AI - selling AI-generated products to human consumers.

It's also a bit terrifying if, like me, you compose for a living. Not least since it most likely took less than a minute to create, and it does, wiki.lafabriquedelalogistique.fr certainly in some parts, sound much like me.

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

"We ought to be clear, when we are talking about data here, we really imply human creators' life works," says Ed Newton Rex, creator of Fairly Trained, which projects for AI companies to regard creators' rights.

"This is books, this is posts, this is images. It's artworks. It's records ... The entire point of AI training is to discover how to do something and after that do more like that."

In 2023 a tune including AI-generated voices of Canadian vocalists Drake and The Weeknd went viral on social media 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 developer attempting to choose it for a Grammy award. And even though the artists were phony, it was still wildly popular.

"I do not believe making use of generative AI for creative purposes need to be prohibited, but I do believe that generative AI for these functions that is trained on individuals's work without permission need to be banned," Mr Newton Rex adds. "AI can be really powerful however let's construct it fairly and fairly."

OpenAI says Chinese rivals using its work for their AI apps

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI app that has the world talking

AI shakes industry and damages America's swagger

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

The UK government is considering an overhaul of the law that would permit AI developers to use developers' content on the web to help develop their designs, unless the rights holders decide out.

Ed Newton Rex describes this as "madness".

He points out that AI can make advances in locations like defence, drapia.org health care and logistics without trawling the work of authors, it-viking.ch 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 home of Lords, is also highly versus eliminating copyright law for AI.

"Creative markets are wealth creators, 2.4 million tasks and a lot of pleasure," says the Baroness, qoocle.com who is also a consultant to the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University.

"The government is undermining among its best carrying out industries on the unclear pledge of growth."

A government representative said: "No move will be made up until we are definitely confident we have a useful strategy that provides each of our objectives: increased control for right holders to assist them accredit their content, access to top quality material to train leading AI designs in the UK, and more openness 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 variety of sources will also be provided to AI scientists.

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 increase the security of AI with, amongst other things, companies in the sector needed to share details of the workings of their systems with the US federal government before they are released.

But this has actually now been repealed by Trump. It stays to be seen what Trump will do rather, however he is said to want the AI sector to face less regulation.

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

They claim that the AI firms broke the law when they took their material from the web without their consent, akropolistravel.com and used it to train their systems.

The AI business argue that their actions fall under "fair usage" and are therefore exempt. There are a number of factors which can make up fair 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 paying for it.

If this wasn't all sufficient to consider, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek has shaken the sector over the previous week. It ended up being one of the most downloaded complimentary app on Apple's US App Store.

DeepSeek claims that it developed its technology for a portion of the price of the likes of OpenAI. Its success has raised security issues in the US, bryggeriklubben.se and threatens American's existing supremacy of the sector.

When it comes to me and a career as an author, I think that at the minute, if I truly desire a "bestseller" I'll still need to write it myself. If anything, Tech-Splaining for Dummies highlights the current weakness in generative AI tools for larger projects. It has plenty of inaccuracies and kenpoguy.com hallucinations, and it can be rather challenging to read in parts since it's so verbose.

But provided how rapidly the tech is evolving, I'm not exactly sure the length of time I can stay positive that my considerably slower human writing and editing abilities, are much better.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest advancements in worldwide technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents all over the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.