Artificial Intelligence and Publishing

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Graham44

Thanks but I think I will stick to deciding for myself what I think is good or bad when forming opinions for any given subject as opposed to forming my opinions on what someone else believes I should think.

Hey, I'm not telling you not to have your own opinions. I was just reacting your own admission that you didn't "like" to think something. So on the outside chance that you didn't realize you didn't have to think it, I merely made a suggestion. But by all means, keep putting the cart before the horse if it agrees with you.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Out of curiosity, what would "embracing AI" look like for publishers?

You asked Apache, who may have a totally different answer. But this web page gives one model:

HarperCollins, Microsoft AI deal sets first public price for training data

The agreement calls for Microsoft to pay a fee of $5,000 per title, split 50-50 between the author and HarperCollins. The deal allows the AI developer to use the data for a period of three years. Payment would be made directly to the author and would not count against a title’s advance.

This deal is surely unavailable to self-published authors. I wonder if it requires a publisher with an attorney who can credibly threaten to sue.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

And as for the comment of Amazon has tons of drivel, by who's definition? One person's drivel is another person's favorite kind of book to read! Enough with the blanket statements.

In my opinion. Too many of the ebooks published by Amazon and others are attempts to jump on whatever bandwagon is currently popular with complaints that many of those copycat books skirt the edge of plagiarism. As has been noted with several complaints about books where the names have been changed but all else is pretty much a word for word of another book as the horrible examples.

A lot of the AI created books on Amazon and elsewhere are dreck with the usual AI hallucinations—this from one person I know who has actually gone to the trouble of downloading hundreds of samples from Amazon and Kobo and then running the samples through several AI detection utilities. The ones that were flagged as AI were purchased—that most of them were 99¢ helped so the total expense wasn't that high though a few eyebrows were raised when looking at his expense reports. The downloaded books were again analyzed and they are now having fun crunching the data and trying to write their thesis. Hopefully, once they have finished and defended their thesis, more information will be available.

As Sturgeon's revelation put it, 90% of everything is crap. Sadly, AI generated content drives that number a lot higher.

I will admit to having read several books that I suspected were AI generated but still better than many human authors' 10 finger exercises.

[John F]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

You asked Apache, who may have a totally different answer. But this web page gives one model:

HarperCollins, Microsoft AI deal sets first public price for training data


This deal is surely unavailable to self-published authors. I wonder if it requires a publisher with an attorney who can credibly threaten to sue.

This sounds like it has possibilities. Customers could have custom written "drivel": "Chat gpt, generate a novella in the style of Steven King with a story line by Lee Child". Full disclosure by all parties, and all parties agree on terms.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by John F

Customers could have custom written "drivel": "Chat gpt, generate a novella in the style of Steven King with a story line by Lee Child". Full disclosure by all parties, and all parties agree on terms.

Did you try it at chatGPT.com?

They give a couple hundred words described as the "opening," and then say:

Want me to continue the full novella—maybe 15 to 20k words, broken into chapters? I can write it piece by piece, serialized like an old-school pulp thriller. Let me know your preferences: tone, level of horror vs. action, or if you want a twist ending.

Are they already paying King and Child to allow this? Anyone know?

If not, I consider this far more objectionable than the Internet Archive COVID lending model that U.S. courts have ruled against.

[John F]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Did you try it at chatGPT.com?

They give a couple hundred words described as the "opening," and then say:



Are they already paying King and Child to allow this? Anyone know?

If not, I consider this far more objectionable than the Internet Archive COVID lending model that U.S. courts have ruled against.

I'M trying to look at it as a glass half full.
If everyone agrees to terms, seems like everyone could get what they want?

[John F]

"AI might undermine one of the better alternatives to the Kindle"

https://www.engadget.com/ai/ai-might...123039955.html

Kobo, a Rakuten subsidiary that sells ebooks and ereaders, has built its name on being a more open and author-friendly version of Amazon Kindle. However, a recent change to the company's self-publishing business has some writers worried that reputation might change. Last month, the company updated its Terms of Service for Kobo Writing Life, its publishing platform, which opened the door to AI features on the platform. With that new contract language going into effect on June 28th, authors seem no clearer on what it will mean for their futures on Kobo.

...

[Quoth]

Kindle has over 90% of English Language ebook sales world wide and allows Ai and content that Kobo & Smashwords/Draft2Digital won't touch.

As usual, poor journalism on engadget.

Now you can distribute to almost everywhere via Draft2Digital (Smashwords), inc Kobo, Tolino, Barnes & Noble (NooK), Amazon (Kindle) and Apple. Not Google Playstore books, but oddly Google is nowhere in book sales.

[DNSB]

From what I read in the KWL conditions, it does not open the door to the use of generative AI in creating books. What Kobo is now allowing is their internal use of AI for advertising/targeting books to users, generating recaps, etc. Much the same stuff that Amazon for instance has been doing for quite a while and likely will have much the same how the <expletive deleted> did they come up with that recommendation comments.

[Quoth]

Generative AI only seems to create books and wastes the environment.

AI is a "catch all" phrase that can mean anything running on a computer.

[Quoth]

EU commissioned report says scraping for LLM isn't fair use.
https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/...enai_fair_use/

The fact that the business model relies on getting stuff free is not mitigation. That's the business model of forgers, counterfeiters and copyright pirates (books, movies, streaming satellite & cable fraud etc).

[Graham44]

Originally Posted by Quoth

EU commissioned report says scraping for LLM isn't fair use.
https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/...enai_fair_use/

The fact that the business model relies on getting stuff free is not mitigation. That's the business model of forgers, counterfeiters and copyright pirates (books, movies, streaming satellite & cable fraud etc).

And lets hope they actually back the finding of the report with some sort of legislation!

I keep seeing in these articles the AI companies arguing that the AI is using material to learn, but learn what? how to copy someone else's work? It's a machine it can't think therefore it cant interpret the material to form it's own conclusions, it just repeats what it stole, framing it in the context of what it was asked.

[SteveEisenberg]

Judges Don’t Know What AI’s Book Piracy Means

A number of news outlets portrayed the rulings as a victory for the tech companies. Wired described the two outcomes as “landmark” and “blockbuster.”

But in fact, the judgments are not straightforward. Each is specific to the particular details of each case, and they do not resolve the question of whether AI training is fair use in general.

.

[Renate]

I'm pretty skeptical of AI in general.
I read about kids having chatbots as "best friends".
I think we'll all get more accepting just by being worn down.

Tech has always been the first adopters of tech.
I find myself often asking Google "I'm using <program> and when I attempt to <verb> <noun> I find <selection> is grayed out."
In such a case I'm willing to try whatever Google AI suggests.
That's quite a bit different from asking, "What were the causes of WWII" or "Rewrite 50 Shades of Grey in verse as hip hop".

[cfrizz]

It's called trying to make money. It happens throughout all of the various entertainment industries from movies to books. Some of the copycats find a slightly different way to tell the same story, but I wouldn't call it plagiarism.

Things that we watch and read and listen to are built on themes, and there are only so many themes to go around so we end up watching, reading, listening to the same themes over and over again, just with a slightly different spin on it.

As for AI, and DRM and all that crap, it's called big business, and their whole goal is for us to buy everything and to own NOTHING! They want to eliminate everyone that they have to pay so that they get ALL profits and make themselves rich.

There is very little that we can do to change that and *itching on web boards will not do anything.

When I find that I disagree about something I do the most important thing that I can. I vote with my money and take my business elsewhere. That is the only language that businesses understand, that is the most effective way to get change to happen.

I stopped buying Amazon books a few years back due to their DRM, and now only shop at Kobo. If Kobo decides to pull the same stunt as Amazon with no longer allowing us to download our purchases to our own pc's I will stop using them as well and search out other options from other ebook sellers.

I am a big rereader and with over 2700 books and a whole lot of fan fiction to read, I could easily drop buying books for the rest of my life and still be happy!

We cannot change the world, and life is too short to be looking for doom and gloom and the end of the world which we also are not able to change.

So, I focus on taking care of and pleasing ME and letting the rest sort itself out.

Life is a lot more peaceful this way.

Originally Posted by DNSB

In my opinion. Too many of the ebooks published by Amazon and others are attempts to jump on whatever bandwagon is currently popular with complaints that many of those copycat books skirt the edge of plagiarism. As has been noted with several complaints about books where the names have been changed but all else is pretty much a word for word of another book as the horrible examples.

A lot of the AI created books on Amazon and elsewhere are dreck with the usual AI hallucinations—this from one person I know who has actually gone to the trouble of downloading hundreds of samples from Amazon and Kobo and then running the samples through several AI detection utilities. The ones that were flagged as AI were purchased—that most of them were 99¢ helped so the total expense wasn't that high though a few eyebrows were raised when looking at his expense reports. The downloaded books were again analyzed and they are now having fun crunching the data and trying to write their thesis. Hopefully, once they have finished and defended their thesis, more information will be available.

As Sturgeon's revelation put it, 90% of everything is crap. Sadly, AI generated content drives that number a lot higher.

I will admit to having read several books that I suspected were AI generated but still better than many human authors' 10 finger exercises.