Authors are striking back against Meta, the tech giant behind Facebook, over the use of their books. They’re upset because Meta used their works to train AI models without asking permission. Big-name writers like Richard Kadrey, Sarah Silverman, and Ta-Nehisi Coates have filed lawsuits, including Kadrey v. Meta, claiming copyright theft. They argue Meta shouldn’t use their ebooks for its LLaMA AI without consent. This fight’s getting loud, and many authors are joining in through class action lawsuits to protect their rights.
Authors are fighting Meta for using their books to train AI without permission, with lawsuits like Kadrey v. Meta claiming copyright theft.
Meta’s fighting back with its own arguments. The company says using these books is fair use and doesn’t hurt anyone. They claim each book’s impact on their AI is tiny, just 0.06%, like background noise. Meta’s lawyers also say there’s no market to pay authors for using their books this way. Plus, they’ve admitted to using a huge collection of books from a site called LibGen, and even removed copyright pages to hide where the books came from. This has only made authors angrier. Additionally, this raises concerns about AI bias issues in how data is selected and used for training models.
Authors aren’t staying quiet about this. The Society of Authors called Meta’s actions “appalling” for using pirated books and demanded payment for writers. Many discovered their entire collections, even unpublished works, in Meta’s training data. Some found translations and different editions of their books in shady databases Meta used. Public calls are growing for tougher copyright laws to stop big tech companies from doing this. The Society of Authors even held a day of action to confront Meta and demand they stop using books without permission. Additionally, the Authors Guild is actively supporting writers by collaborating with publishers and the federal government to combat piracy and protect authors’ rights combat piracy.
This battle’s raising big questions about copyright and AI. Legal experts say Meta’s use isn’t “transformative” since it just copies works to compete in business. They compare it to teaching human writers, which isn’t seen as fair use. Courts haven’t given companies like Meta such wide rights before. A group of copyright law professors has also filed an amicus brief supporting authors, arguing Meta’s fair use defense oversteps legal boundaries amicus brief supporting. There’s a gap in laws about AI training, and many want clearer rules to protect authors.
Meanwhile, writers worry they’re losing control and money as their works are used without approval, hurting the publishing world and raising ethical concerns for the future of creative industries.
