Thousands of authors, including Kazuo Ishiguro, Philippa Gregory and Richard Osman, have published an “empty” book to protest artificial intelligence companies that use their work without permission.
About 10,000 writers have contributed to Don’t Steal This Book, the only content of which is a list of their names. Copies of the work will be distributed to attendees at the London book fair on Tuesday, a week before the UK government issues an assessment on the economic cost of proposed changes to copyright law.
By March 18, ministers are due to deliver an economic impact assessment, as well as a progress update on a consultation on legal reform, amid anger among creative professionals over how AI companies are using their work.
The book’s organizer, Ed Newton-Rex, a songwriter and activist for protecting artists’ copyrights, said the AI industry was “built on stolen work… taken without permission or payment.”
He added: “This is not a victimless crime – generative AI is competing with the people whose work it is trained to do, stealing their livelihoods. The government must protect the UK’s creatives and refuse to legalize the theft of creative work by AI companies.”
Other authors who have contributed their names to the book include Slow Horses author Mick Herron; author Marian Keyes; historian David Olusoga; and Malorie Blackman, the writer of Noughts and Crosses.
“It’s not unreasonable to expect AI companies to pay for the use of authors’ books,” Blackman said.
The back cover of the books says: “The UK government should not legalize book theft to benefit AI companies.”
The publishers will also launch an AI licensing initiative at the London book fair. Publishers’ Licensing Services, a not-for-profit industry body, is establishing a collective licensing scheme and has invited the industry to subscribe in the expectation that it will give legal access to published works.
AI requires large amounts of data, including copyrighted works pulled from the open web, to develop tools such as chatbots and image generators. This has caused consternation among creative professionals and businesses around the world, sparking lawsuits on both sides of the Atlantic.
Last year, Anthropic, a leading artificial intelligence company and developer of the Claude chatbot, agreed to pay $1.5bn (£1.1bn) to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by book authors who claimed the startup took pirated copies of their works to train its flagship product.
British artists have responded with indignation to the main government proposal in the consultation. It proposes allowing AI companies to use copyrighted works without the owner’s permission, unless the owner has indicated they want to opt out of the process. Elton John is one of the artists who have protested at the prospect of a relaxation of copyright law, calling the government an “absolute loser”.
In addition to the government’s main proposal, ministers have suggested three further options: leaving the situation unchanged; require AI companies to apply for licenses to use copyrighted works; or allow AI companies to use copyrighted works without the ability to opt-out for creative companies and individuals.
The government has also refused to rule out a copyright exemption for using material for “commercial research” purposes, which creative professionals fear could be exploited by artificial intelligence companies to take artists’ work without permission.
A government spokesperson said: “The government wants a copyright regime that values and protects human creativity, is trusted and unlocks innovation. We will continue to work closely with the creative sector on this issue and deliver on our commitment to update parliament by 18 March.”
