Writers refused to steal a book: nearly ten thousand authors released an "empty" book to protest against artificial intelligence.

Brief summary of the news report

*About ten thousand writers, including well‑known authors Kazuo Ishiguro, Philip Gregory and Richard Osman, have joined the “Don’t Steal This Book” community. Their collection contains only a list of those who oppose using their works to train artificial intelligence (AI). The book will be displayed at the London Book Fair before the UK government presents an assessment of the economic impacts of proposed changes to copyright law.*

1. Status as of March 18
- Planned report: British ministers must provide an analysis of the economic impact of reforms to copyright legislation, taking into account protests from creative professionals.
- Main goal: Protect writers and other creators from “the theft” of their works in AI.

2. Who is behind the campaign
Figure Role Ed Newton‑Rex Composer, copyright advocate; initiator of the book “Don’t Steal This Book”. Author list includes participants: Mike Heron (“Stuck Horses”), Maria Case, David Olusoga, Melori Blackman (author of “Tic‑Tac‑Toe”). Newton‑Rex claims that the AI industry “is built on stolen works,” and the book states: *“The government should not legalise the theft of books for AI companies.”* Posters with the slogan “Power Off” circulate on the streets.

3. Arguments against
- Economic damage: Generative AI competes with people, depriving them of income.
- Call to action: The government must protect creative people and refuse to legalise the use of their works without consent.

4. Licensing proposal
- Publishers’ Licensing Services (non‑profit sector) is developing a collective licensing scheme.
- Goal: Provide lawful access to published works for AI training while paying authors.

5. International examples and context
- Anthropic: Last year the company paid $1.5 million as settlement of a class action from book authors.
- Global alarm: AI requires huge amounts of data, including protected works on the internet.

6. Reaction of a public figure
- Elton John sharply responded to the government’s proposal, calling it “absolute losers.”

7. Three alternative government scenarios
1. Public copyright regime – protecting creativity and encouraging innovation.
2. Rejection of an exemption for commercial research – so AI companies cannot simply “appropriate” works without permission.
3. Obligation to provide updated information to Parliament by March 18.

8. Additional events
- In February 2025 a group of 1,000 musicians released the album *Is This What We Want?*, becoming a symbol of protest against using their recordings in AI without consent.

Conclusion
The focus is on the conflict between the government’s desire to simplify use of copyrighted material for AI and protecting creative people’s interests. The key issue is whether the government will allow AI companies to use protected works without consent or implement a licensing system that pays authors. In the coming weeks an official assessment of economic impacts is expected, followed by further discussion on resolving the conflict.