Thousands of authors have joined a coordinated protest against technology firms they say are training artificial intelligence on copyrighted work without permission by publishing an intentionally empty book titled "Don't Steal This Book". The volume, which contains only a roll-call of nearly 10,000 writers, is being distributed at the London Book Fair as a statement of opposition to what organisers call the unremunerated appropriation of creative labour. According to ITV, names on the list include Richard Osman, Jacqueline Wilson and Malorie Blackman. [2]

The campaign was organised by composer Ed Newton-Rex, who said the action was meant to highlight how generative AI “is built on stolen work - the life's work of writers and other creatives, taken without permission or payment.” He added: “This is not a victimless crime - generative AI competes with the people whose work it is trained on, robbing them of their livelihoods.” The Guardian reports prominent authors named among participants include Kazuo Ishiguro, Philippa Gregory and Richard Osman. [3][2]

Organisers and participating writers framed the stunt as a plea to the UK government to resist calls from technology companies for broad exemptions to copyright law that would allow models to be trained on copyrighted material without compensation. Euronews said the campaign aims to prevent ministers from legalising the use of copyrighted material by AI companies without payment to creators. [4]

The protest comes as debate over copyright and AI has intensified in Westminster. The Financial Times reported that ministers, after a two-month consultation on AI and copyright, were preparing to delay making a definitive decision, with one source saying the issue would be “kicked down the road.” Campaigners say a postponement risks tacitly advantaging firms seeking looser rules. [1]

Economic analysis commissioned by industry groups that back creators has further fuelled the argument against weakening copyright. A review by management consultants Oliver and Ohlbaum, commissioned by the News Media Association and publishing trade bodies, concluded that modelling presented by Big Tech and their allies overstated the benefits of diluting copyright and ignored more pressing barriers to AI growth such as skills shortages and energy constraints; the study characterised those commercial claims as “fantasy economics,” according to the organiser of the review. [1]

This protest is the latest in a trend of creative professionals pushing back against AI training practices. Last year authors staged demonstrations outside Meta's London offices amid allegations the company drew on unauthorised online libraries to train its models; court filings alleged Meta had used the shadow library LibGen. Earlier musical protests have included blank recordings released by established musicians to underline similar grievances about unauthorised use of artistic work. [5][6][7]

Organisers say the empty book is intended both as a practical demonstration , showing what would be lost if authors are sidelined , and as a public demand for policymakers to ensure creators are credited and paid. With ministers signalling a cautious approach to immediate reform and industry modelling under scrutiny, the dispute over whether and how copyright rules should adapt to generative AI looks set to remain a central flashpoint between creators, technology companies and government. [2][3][1]

Source Reference Map

Inspired by headline at: [1]

Sources by paragraph:

Source: Noah Wire Services