“Library Genesis, the pirated database of millions of books, scientific papers, comics, and magazine issues, was used by Meta to train its flagship AI model.
Court documents released on March 19 show that senior staff at Meta obtained permission from company CEO Mark Zuckerberg to download and use Library Genesis, or LibGen, to train its AI model Llama 3.
LibGen’s collection currently contains more than 7.5 million books and 81 million research papers. While much of the content is in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, the database also includes literary works authored and published by museums, artists, architects, and art galleries.”
I knew a version of this was going on, but the news made it stark and concrete. Searching the Libgen database showed at least one of my novels in it. Dozens of novels by friends and idols were in it. Scrolling through my timeline, I noticed that books by hundreds of authors I know were in it.
So if you’re using Meta AI, you’re also using words/ training from all these books. And I’m small fry–Meta has allegedly done this to all stripes of authors, and there’s a huge class action lawsuit filed against them. More about it here.
“In recently filed court documents, Meta, led by founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is alleged to have deliberately and explicitly authorized a raid on LibGen—and Anna’s Archive, another massive digital pirate haven—to train its latest AI model, Llama 3.”
If you’re an author, you can check if Meta has possibly scraped your work via LibGen, here.
If you want to take any sort of action as an author, however small, this might help.
Whether you’re a published Indie or Trad, Meta may have stolen from you. Their machines are hungry for human stories, because they need their machines to learn how to sound human.
Tech giants are able to rob authors with impunity because techbros have got everyone used to the concept of FREE. Any creation can be ‘used’ for ‘free’ because ‘technological advancement!!’ which lines techbro pockets.
When I think of AI in art and (creative) writing, I wonder why we need AI in these fields.
AI is supposed to be useful to humans, or at least that’s what it’s being toted as. In what way is AI art useful?
Two ways come to mind:
One, anyone can now create ‘art’ with the click of a few buttons, which has nothing to do with the original intent of art as human expression as individuals and community, of invention and creativity. True democratization of art and increasing its accessibility is not the result–anyone with pencil and paper has access to writing and drawing. Anyone with internet can study the arts. What’s being made ‘accessible’ is a shortcut to ‘creating’ images and stories by anyone who actually can’t do it without the help of a machine. Those who can’t draw a straight line can now convert photos to ‘paintings’. Those who can’t string a sentence together can now ‘write stories’.
Two, art can now easily be reduced to aesthetics, and as very easily available escapism for the masses–the masses who are not supposed to have the leisure to create art but only to consume a substandard, machine-made version of it.
Why am I mopping floors and AI is creating art, instead of the other way around? It’s because it’s cheaper for AI to create so-called art for exploitation by corporate entities. AI in science possibly makes human progress faster (and has other benefits like saving elephants in India), but unless it is lining the pockets of techbros and giving talentless hacks the unearned pride of ‘creating art’ what the heck is AI art good for?
When I see ‘authors’ on my timeline touting their use of AI to write a novel, I question why everyone wants to ‘create art’ or ‘write poetry’ by typing a few buttons.
Art is very much about the artist and the process–it is an original, inspired expression of humanity. The wonderful people ‘playing’ with AI to create what they think is art choose to ignore that. Art is not just the product, it is also the process. Generating content is not art, but you can’t expect non-artists to understand that.
All this brings me to the question: why do I write books?
It is one thing to not need external validation, to write to please no one but myself, write it with pencil on paper and keep it in a filing cabinet. Being a traditionally published author though, I write books that are meant to be read. At the same time my book reaches readers, it will also reach AI, which is possibly even now scraping this blog. I haven’t yet figured out how to stop it with code.
So, while I write in search of meaning, I’m also unwittingly writing to satisfy corporate greed. Is that something I want to do? Why should I keep myself open to exploitation of my creative drive by nameless corporate evil overlords?
If technology is geared towards digesting stolen art to vomit out something that is human-shaped (read this story to see what AI is capable in terms of storytelling) and cutting the genuine creators out of a livelihood or any recompense, monetary or otherwise, what are my options as an author?
I don’t have all the answers, but I know this: I’m in one of the stages of grief right now.
I went through denial, rage, (I will never do bargaining), depression. I don’t know when the stage of acceptance will show up.
I’m not violent by nature despite having written three books featuring gruesome crimes, but these days I wake up from dreams where I’m sitting by a river, waiting for dead bodies to float by. And in my dream, I’m not terrified, but in eager anticipation of the faces of heinous corporate robbery.
That’s what scares me the most: the fact that this assault on human creativity is turning me into a person I’d rather not be. It is personal. Writing from a place of passion and meaning apparently has more downsides than I’d bargained for.
Are you an author or a reader, or both? As an author do you use or support AI in art? Do you find meaning in your art or writing? As a reader do you love the idea of AI in art? Will you support AI-authored books?
This is the first Wednesday of the month post for the Insecure Writer’s Support Group. Founded by the Ninja Cap’n Alex J. Cavanaugh, the purpose of the group is to offer a safe space where writers can share their fears and insecurities without being judged.
The awesome co-hosts for the posting of the IWSG are Jennifer Lane, L Diane Wolfe, Jenni Enzor, and Natalie Aguirre! Please go and visit them and show your support.
———————————————————————————————————
My Amazon-bestselling literary crime novels, The Blue Bar and The Blue Monsoon are on Kindle Unlimited now. Add to Goodreads or snag a copy to make my day ! And if you’d like to read a book outside the series, you can check out You Beneath Your Skin. Find all info about my books on my Amazon page or Linktree.
—
————————————————————————–
If you liked this post, you can receive posts in your inbox, or keep updated on my writing by clicking on any or all of the following buttons:
GET CURATED PUBLISHING RESOURCES SUBSCRIBE TO BLOG JOIN DAILY(W)RITE ON FB FOLLOW ON BOOKBUB
Discover more from Damyanti Biswas
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
As an author and lover of books, I am appalled at the concept of AI usurping art in any form
I think about this everything time I get a Ghibili reel on my feed. What an irony because the artist was stark against it. I am so sorry your book landed on pirated site … I thought that could be a worse scenario, but then what these algorithms are doing is much worse. 😳 And just like “art” we might end up with books with no soul.
Yes, I read about how Hayao Miyazaki refused to compromise on his vision for Studio Ghibli and how much he values authenticity and artistic expression. Yet when I search up Studio Ghibli, there’s an endless list of AI software designed to blatantly plagiarize his work. “Free AI Ghibli Generator”, “Studio Ghibli AI”, “How to Create Studio Ghibli-Style AI Images for Free” — it’s such an insult to the very thing Miyazaki has been standing up for.
Yeah, I had a couple books in there too. Really frustrating. I didn’t hear about the class action lawsuit, but maybe I should get in on that action, eh? I’m grateful other friends notified me about the potential piracy, but it’s done now. I don’t think you can untrain AI unless you wipe it and start from scratch.
And sadly, even with the number of people speaking up against it, AI developers don’t seem to have any intention of stopping.
I’m sickened by AI and the rationalizations by techbro grifters who are impatient with the artistic process because, as you wrote, they don’t understand it. I believe AI will strike a devastating blow to our imaginations, our minds. Regardless of how much good it can accomplish, I see the bad actors outdoing the good. At some point, copyrights may not even apply to our works, if AI generators have a say – and they do.
That’s a good point, Denise. Horrible to think about, but impossible to avoid. I just hope they draw the line at some point. The lack of empathy and respect for creativity is painful to witness, especially considering the dedication and emotion that goes into our work.
That is just so wrong and that Mark Z okayed it is even worse.
AI companies and developers are allowed to get away with so much in the name of “progress”.
What Meta did is terrible. I don’t know how they can make it right
A step in the right direction would be to start asking permission. It definitely doesn’t make up for everything they’ve already pirated, but it’s basic decency.
That’s a grewsom title
I saw the LibGen issue a few days ago when a crime-writer author I follow shared a petition from the UK supporting the demand that LibGen ask permission and pay royalties for their use of these books. I signed, of course…
Then an email popped up from KDP (Amazon) telling me I could be on their beta roll-out of a free audiobook production – using AI voices, of course. And it took me at least five minutes to realise… how to get an author to give them their books to train their AI (and doubtless several other companies’ AI systems). It’s probably there in the small print, so BEWARE, everybody.
That’s terrifying, and it’s ridiculous how much AI companies and developers are allowed to get away with or conceal in the small print. Thank you for the warning, Jemima.
Hi, Damyanti, I’m so sorry and I’d have to say I 10000% agree with you. As a fiction writer myself, I can’t imagine the frustration and anger of AI simply copying all my emotional writing that I’ve spent days upon days working on. As a high school creative writer who posts chapters on WordPress, I can say for sure that this needs to stop, we can’t be punished for publicizing our books. Its ridiculous that AI does this, it needs to stop.
You hit the nail on the head. It now feels like a punishment to put our work out into the world, knowing that AI could swoop in and steal it at any second.
I’m so sorry your work has been pirated and misused in this way. Your post really resonated with me. I think there are good uses of AI, but replacing human creativity with soulless substitutes is not it. I suppose we can’t expect soulless tech bros to understand that, though.
It’s sad to see how much compassion and morality is lacking. AI causes real damage to real people, yet it continues to reap the rewards of its piracy. Like you said, AI has so much potential for good, but is instead being used to exploit the hard work and individuality of creatives.
Hi, Damyanti! What an excellent and disturbing article. I’m so sorry that you have experienced this. It’s like someone raping your soul. And the nightmares, how unsettling ~ I admit, a few faces appeared on those bodies as I imagined what you described (gallows humor 😂). I’ve been experiencing unusually violent or frightening nightmares too. I did check for all the variations of my name and nothing of mine has been copied. But there were lots of names very close to mine, and I was shocked at how many pirated copies of books and papers popped up. I will not support books written by AI. There are plenty of books written by humans I can and will read. Thank you for writing this.
Thank you for sharing! I’m so relieved that your work is safe, and hopefully it stays that way. It’s so appalling to see how much theft and plagiarism the software has already engaged in, and the potential for other authors to fall victim to it. It seems impossible to avoid. But, like you said, a way of supporting real writers is to avoid AI-written books. And I intend to do the same.
I checked the site and all that was copied from me was some robotics research articles that I wrote 30+ years ago. I am not too concerned about that. My Leonberger book (the only book I’ve written) was not there. I agree, AI writing a novel or doing art is far from a human doing it. At least you know that there is real feelings, thinking and expressions grounded in flesh and blood in it. If I knew a book was written by AI I would not be eager to read it.
Absolutely. I wouldn’t like the thought of reading something generated from pirated novels and emotionless software. The personal aspect of a piece of art or writing adds so much value and connection. How could AI measure up to that?
I’m not sure what I think about AI. But I know that for human creators to learn how to create, they also had to study what was done before. Why does it surprise us that AIs need to learn? Or does the objections spring from the fact that they learn from pirated copies? Would it be OK if they bought all those books first? Would you be OK if that company META bought your novels before feeding them into AI?
I don’t like the idea of AIs writing fiction, but maybe I’m wrong. I do like using AI-generated images for my book covers. Although I don’t own any AI software, the artists who supply free AI-generated images do. And I utilize their images, combine them to produce something new. Am I wrong to do that? You’re right in one respect: the image-manipulation software plus a website of free images allow me – a person who can’t draw – create my own art. Sort of, at least. And it gives me immense satisfaction. Anyway, I don’t sell my book covers. That, at least, should make it better. Right?
Olga, this is a very nuanced discussion and I can only share my views.
AI in art was not needed because really, art is a uniquely human expression. Animals do not create art. The only reason AI got into art is to benefit techbro billionaires who wish to replace art with aesthetics and make money off the back of artists without compensating them. They only understand the monetary and mechanical aspect of art, not the value of inspiration and imagination.
As to paying authors to feed books into AI— well, it would have been marginally better than the daylight robbery of stealing from them outright.
You have an objection to fiction being written by AI because you’re intimate with the process of creating fiction and understand the mechanics, the intuition and the emotion involved. AI reduces it to mechanics alone, regurgitating what it’s eaten, vomiting out passable prose/stories which might be technically better but lack human soul.
If you look at art from the same lens, you might see the use of AI as thievery and reducing art to mechanics.
Just like you derive satisfaction from AI covers without paying an artist or being able to draw, I wonder if you’d like to consider how it would feel to have someone derive great satisfaction in producing a story which is based on your soul, creativity and emotion?
I can’t tell you what’s right or wrong — that’s a conclusion for you to reach based on a clear-headed, balanced and honest look at everything that’s involved in the use of AI-generated ‘art’.
It scares me to think if writing will even matter some years from now. It will probably matter personally but for a larger consumption, there will already be enough. So I guess, we carry on doing what we do for that personal bit. The rest- can we control it at all?
There are so many questions that we don’t have the answer to, and knowledge that AI is purposely keeping obscured. You’re right, it’s a terrifying thought. I can only hope that audiences will want writing that is produced by real people, rather than bots.
My books were also listed on the site when I checked a while ago. There’s a lot I don’t understand about AI–how can it write a whole book based on some prompts? I hope you stop having disturbing dreams. <3
I’m so sorry to hear that. When it comes to AI, there’s so much we’ve been kept in the dark about. Thank you for the kind words!
Damyanti this government sanctioned raid by the oligarchs on our personal property is alarming. They innocently say it is not harvesting your material but simply training their AI monsters to provide information useful to society in general, however it is in fact harvesting copyrighted material and the present attitude of those in power who support the oligarchs needs to change and have this brought under control.
I completely agree, I don’t see how this sort of theft and violation of copyright could ever be allowed. And even with the backlash, they keep going. It’s unacceptable.
Wow! What an insightful and emotional post. Thank you for sharing your concern and your passion.
Thank you for stopping by!
AI is destroying true creativity.
I just hope there will still be an audience who appreciates human-made art and writing, and true creativity will always take precedence over AI-generated work.
There’s just too much to grieve about these days. I’m usually pretty optimistic, but 2025 has taken its toll, and the AI debacle has added insult to injury.
https://substack.com/@cleemckenzie
It feels like the final nail in the coffin.
Wow! I’m sorry about this. I will use the link you provided to check if my works have been taken and I have been raped. Because to me using other’s word’s without permission is a form of rape. I agree with how you feel about AI and arts. Artistic talent, whether it is writing or another art medium, are gifts we are given to use to make the world more beautiful, more tolerable, more enjoyable. Art, no matter what form it takes, is not art if it is created by a machine. Then it is a false god imagined by its creator made to give someone fame. Art created by AI is nothing more than someone with no talent making something to feel better about themselves and prove to the world they can be like people they envy. True artists, including us writers, know the struggle that goes into each work, the pain that is involved with each creation and also the rejections by many of their pieces. AI, I believe, serves one purpose, and that is solely in a lab where researchers and scientists can play out all scenarios in the hopes to find a better way to defeat diseases, hunger, and improve medical devices and surgeries. All art forms need to be left in the hands of the gifted who possess their talents. Not in the hands of those who can’t do but want to. But if there were to happen, then the people of the world would start learning how to appreciate others and I don’t see the world becoming that way.
You’ve said it all. I completely understand the desire to make art, and I have the utmost respect for those who put in the effort to learn. But AI art is not art. AI is the easy way out, bypassing the many obstacles, failures, and frustrations that true creatives are sure to encounter. As you mentioned, it would be much better suited for a lab or an application which doesn’t involve ripping off people’s hard work.
Aaargh. I am so sorry to read this. And angry too.
It’s a whole mix of emotions!
There isn’t much intelligence in A’I’ – this is what it is using of mine (according to The Atlantic):
“Hydrocarbon Transport in a Plasma Boundary Layer
Fusion Technology
William D. Langer, Alicia Butcher Ehrhardt”
one of a number of papers written while I was actively engaged in fusion research over 35 years ago (before I got ME/CFS and lost it). I can see no earthly use for that in training anything.
But I would be furious if it were touching my published mainstream fiction, as it took me 15 years to write Pride’s Children: PURGATORY, 7 years to write Pride’s Children: NETHERWORLD, and so far 3 years (estimated 3 more) I’ve spent working on the final book of the trilogy, LIMBO. Hard long years of work by a damaged human to get to make it real.
I can understand your fury. I’m just too small potatoes (except, apparently, in my original field – LOL) to have been affected YET.
The amount of time and energy invested into creating something that we’re proud of, only to have it ripped off by AI in seconds. There’s no excuse for that. And, like you said, it’s our personal damage and experiences that feed the pieces that we create, the work that we want to put out into the world. We should be able to do that without worrying about piracy, poor ethics, and the theft of our livelihoods.
None of my books are in LibGen except for a short story anthology with several other writers. My brother and nephew have a number of engineering articles in there. As for generative AI in general, I’m adamently against using it. As you say, producing content and creating art are NOT the same thing.
Absolutely. I don’t see how they could ever be considered in the same category or even on the same level. Between creating and blatant copying, I know which I’d prefer to see more of in the world.
I saw it on another site and notified my publisher. Added it to the IWSG post today. Four of my books are in there! Definitely protested.
That’s terrible, I’m so sorry. I’m glad you caught it and I hope there’s something that can be done to get them off. There’s no excuse for piracy and plagiarism.
Thanks, Damyanti, for highlighting the many problems. Today’s post at Tame Your Book shares a link to Sue Coletta’s post about this serious theft issue. The other links on my site show the magnitude of additional issues. However, what I’ve shared is only the tip of a destructive iceberg.
I appreciate the possibilities of large language models. Those models can have a positive influence on science and medicine. However, when we allow generative AI to harm people, that’s too much. For example, yesterday I read about the “AI companion” for children. A simple question: what could go wrong with your child visiting unsupervised with the likes of an adult stranger?
I could go on, but it takes only a few moments to dive below Google’s AI summarizations to find suicides, fraud, blackmail, child pornography, revenge porn, and so much more. These problems stem from many of the same apps used by writers. Unfortunately, too many authors remain unaware of the issues.
Thanks for making people aware of the issues. Without legal recourse, it’s going to be tough to fight the corporate greed driving much of the harm. As a reminder to our writing community, the ways writers use AI shouts louder than the words we write.
Thank you for sharing, Grant. Your post is so well-written and brings awareness to the more sinister effects of AI, showing a glimpse of how dangerous it can be. “Destructive iceberg” is right. AI companion for children sounds like an absolute nightmare. The issue is that so many of the basic safety protocols are being bypassed or ignored in the name of technological development. Like I said to Jacqui, it’s ridiculous and appalling.
The enormous problem is so much worse than many imagine. Unfortunately, too many writers are unaware. From my point of view, AI is like eating watermelon. We need to eat the meat (e.g., medicinal opportunities) and spit out the seeds (e.g., pornography, fraud, ruined reputations, etc.). In this analogy, the “seeds” are poisonous, and once ingested, most victims discover there’s no antidote.
I found some of my books in LibGen. Probably picked up from pirated book sites.
I am a writer. If I used AI to write I wouldn’t be able to call myself a writer.
I’m so sorry to hear that. I couldn’t agree more — if I used AI to write my books for me, I wouldn’t even qualify the products as my work.
I don’t think it’s illegal, either. Doesn’t make sense.
I find a bit of relief in that I don’t find The Atlantic to be a reliable reporter. Maybe they have it wrong.
Absolutely, I find it quite ridiculous. It should fall under copyright infringement laws and qualify as plagiarism or intellectual theft. More safety measures need to be put into place to avoid this kind of blatant piracy.
I remain convinced that the A.I. bubble will eventually burst. This technology exploits people, it’ exploits material resources, it’s very expensive to operate, and (based on what I’ve read) it sounds like it doesn’t really produce a profit. Apparently the companies behind A.I. keep telling investors to be patient, that a breakthrough is right around the corner, so don’t pull your money out of this yet.
So I think this is a bubble, and I think it will burst, eventually. But it is infuriating how many people are getting hurt in the meantime.
Interesting view, and one I hope comes true.
I’ve already noticed some companies pulling back from exclusive use of AI bots. Thankfully, they’re returning to allowing contact with humans. WordPress comes to mind, and it’s welcome relief.
Unfortunately, that relief doesn’t apply to the theft of copyrighted material, so I hope for a ground-breaking legal president that holds leaders accountable for the harm they’ve caused.
Without significant dents in corporate profits plus legal accountability of leadership, more harm will befall too many victims.
I hope so, too. I think the law will catch up to A.I. eventually, too (“eventually” being the key word). And again, it is infuriating to me that so many people are getting hurt in the meantime.
Agreed. It’s unethical and immoral, to say the least. This post definitely doesn’t capture the extent of the damage AI is causing the creative community — in fact, I think I could write a hundred blog posts about it and still find some new issue to talk about. And that’s what scares me. It feels never-ending, but I really hope your prediction comes to pass. They can’t get away from it forever. Can they? Fingers crossed.
Fingers crossed indeed!