Authors Protest AI Copyright Theft at London Book Fair

The growing clash between artificial intelligence and the publishing world came sharply into focus at this year’s London Book Fair, where thousands of writers united to protest the use of copyrighted books in AI training without permission or payment. Their protest took the form of an unusual publication titled Don’t Steal This Book, an “empty” book containing only the names of about 10,000 contributing authors. That striking format was meant to send a warning about what could happen if writers lose control over their work: empty pages, lost income, and a weaker future for literature itself.

The campaign arrives at a critical moment in the UK. By 18 March, the government is due to publish both an economic impact assessment and a progress update on its consultation over possible copyright law changes. The proposal drawing the strongest backlash would allow AI companies to use copyrighted material unless creators specifically opt out. Many authors, artists, and publishers argue that this approach unfairly shifts the burden onto creators while giving technology companies easier access to work they never licensed. Ed Newton-Rex, the composer and campaigner behind Don’t Steal This Book, has accused the AI industry of being built on work taken without permission or payment. He argues that this is not a victimless process, because generative AI can compete directly with the writers whose books helped train it.

The scale of support behind the protest shows how deeply the issue has resonated across the literary world. Among the authors involved are Kazuo Ishiguro, Richard Osman, Philippa Gregory, Marian Keyes, Mick Herron, Malorie Blackman, Alan Moore, and David Olusoga. The back cover of the book states that the UK government must not legalise book theft to benefit AI companies, a message aimed directly at policymakers. The campaign website makes the same point even more bluntly, arguing that if AI companies want to use books, they should pay for them like everyone else.

The protest is unfolding alongside broader industry efforts to create practical safeguards for human authors. At the same London Book Fair, the UK Society of Authors launched a “Human Authored” logo that writers can register to place on their books. The label is meant to help readers identify works created by people in a market that many fear is becoming flooded with AI generated content. The Society of Authors says the absence of government rules requiring clear labeling for AI generated books has made it harder for readers to know what they are buying. The scheme follows a similar initiative introduced by the Authors Guild in the United States in early 2025 and has already won support from high profile writers including Mary Beard and Malorie Blackman.

The logo is being presented as a practical response to a fast changing marketplace, but it also reflects a broader cultural argument. Supporters say reading is not only about consuming information. It is also about connecting with a human voice, imagination, and experience. Blackman argued that creative work demands time, effort, learning, and perseverance, and that those qualities are part of what gives books their value. Anna Ganley, the Society of Authors’ chief executive, said a recent survey found that 82% of members would be interested in a Human Authored certification scheme, showing strong demand for ways to promote and protect human creativity.

Meanwhile, publishers are also pursuing a licensing solution. Publishers’ Licensing Services is launching a collective AI licensing initiative and inviting the sector to join, in the hope of creating a legal route for access to published works. That effort stands in contrast to fears that the government could go in the opposite direction. Ministers have also discussed other options, including leaving the law unchanged, requiring licences, or even allowing AI firms to use copyrighted work with no opt out at all. Creative professionals are especially worried about suggestions that a copyright waiver for “commercial research” could be exploited by AI companies. Together, the protest, the new logo, and the push for licensing show that authors are no longer willing to watch quietly as AI reshapes the rules of creative ownership.

Works Cited

Milmo, Dan. “Thousands of Authors Publish ‘Empty’ Book in Protest over AI Using Their Work.” The Guardian, 10 Mar. 2026, www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/10/thousands-authors-publish-empty-book-protest-ai-work-copyright. 

“UK Society of Authors Launches Logo to Identify Books Written by Humans Not AI.” The Guardian, 10 Mar. 2026, www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/10/uk-society-authors-logo-identify-books-written-by-humans-not-ai. 

Mouriquand, David. “‘Don’t Steal This Book’: Authors Protest AI at London Book Fair with ‘Empty’ Book.” Yahoo News, 10 Mar. 2026, www.yahoo.com/news/articles/don-t-steal-book-authors-103227737.html. 

Roy, Dwaipayan. “This Book Written by 10,000 Authors Is ‘Empty.’” NewsBytes, 10 Mar. 2026, www.newsbytesapp.com/news/science/why-10-000-authors-joined-hands-to-publish-an-empty-book/story. Accessed 10 Mar. 2026. 

“AI Giants Are Stealing Our Creative Work.” Good Law Project, 11 Apr. 2025, goodlawproject.org/ai-giants-are-stealing-our-creative-work/. Accessed 10 Mar. 2026.