Amazon Reverses Course On 'Garbage Books' Written By AI 25
Amazon removed several books believed to be written using AI and listed under a real author's name. Decrypt reports: When professor Jane Friedman complained about books that she didn't write being attributed to her on Monday, ecommerce giant Amazon initially said that it would not remove them. But after she took her case to Twitter, earning the backing of the Authors Guild, Amazon relented early this morning. Friedman -- a non-fiction writer, journalist, and educator -- said Amazon had refused to remove the books even though they appeared to trade on her name and reputation as an author who has published how-to guides for other writers.
The "garbage books," which Friedman says were probably churned out using generative AI, had the titles "Your Guide to Writing a Bestseller eBook on Amazon," "Publishing Power: Navigating Amazon's Kindle Direct Publishing," and "Promote to Prosper: Strategies to Skyrocket Your eBook Sales on Amazon." When Friedman acknowledged that she could not prove that she owned the trademark on her own name, she said Amazon said it would leave the book up and for sale. But that stance changed late Monday night when the books began disappearing from Amazon's website, and after the Authors Guild offered to step in on Friedman's behalf.
"We have clear content guidelines governing which books can be listed for sale and promptly investigate any book when a concern is raised," Amazon spokesperson Ashley Vanicek told Decrypt by email. "We welcome author feedback and work directly with authors to address any issues they raise and where we have made an error, we correct it." Other authors responding to Friedman's tweet said the same thing had happened to them, and in some cases, the publisher of the fraudulent books did more than just use their names. [...] On Tuesday, Friedman again took to Twitter to confirm that the fraudulent works were removed from Amazon. She remained concerned, however, that other writers like Hayes -- who do not have the large audience that she does -- would not be able to raise such a "big red flag."
The "garbage books," which Friedman says were probably churned out using generative AI, had the titles "Your Guide to Writing a Bestseller eBook on Amazon," "Publishing Power: Navigating Amazon's Kindle Direct Publishing," and "Promote to Prosper: Strategies to Skyrocket Your eBook Sales on Amazon." When Friedman acknowledged that she could not prove that she owned the trademark on her own name, she said Amazon said it would leave the book up and for sale. But that stance changed late Monday night when the books began disappearing from Amazon's website, and after the Authors Guild offered to step in on Friedman's behalf.
"We have clear content guidelines governing which books can be listed for sale and promptly investigate any book when a concern is raised," Amazon spokesperson Ashley Vanicek told Decrypt by email. "We welcome author feedback and work directly with authors to address any issues they raise and where we have made an error, we correct it." Other authors responding to Friedman's tweet said the same thing had happened to them, and in some cases, the publisher of the fraudulent books did more than just use their names. [...] On Tuesday, Friedman again took to Twitter to confirm that the fraudulent works were removed from Amazon. She remained concerned, however, that other writers like Hayes -- who do not have the large audience that she does -- would not be able to raise such a "big red flag."
Re: (Score:2)
They have many courses on this topic. as you didn't include sarcasm tags I'm assuming you're 100% serious.
And if you're being 100% serious, then that's not the definition of "reversing course":
To suddenly hold or profess a position or opinion that runs contrary or opposite to one held previously.
quick question did anyone click on the link and read the article?
Yes, which is why you've left me more confused as to your non-sarcastic answer...?
Re: (Score:2)
If they are reversing course, are they not going to be offering the course anymore?
Uh, when someone uses the term "reversing course" like this, it's not being used as a literal nautical instruction nor a reference to school education:
To suddenly hold or profess a position or opinion that runs contrary or opposite to one held previously.
In this case, it refers to the mental business decision to stop selling "garbage" books created by AI and under the specific name of the offended human author.
Ironically enough, Amazon likely has no policy on AI books written by "garbage" human authors.
Truly amazing that "Impersonating an Author"... (Score:5, Insightful)
is not ALREADY against Amazon's terms of service.
Oh wait this is the modern Amazon, which has more bullshit knockoffs and fake crap than almost anywhere short of Temu. [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Amazons always had a problem with scam books.
I remember back in the day you'd see almost any search flooded with bogus "books" that would essentially be 4 or 5 wikipedia articles printed out and bound into a "book", seemingly just on alphabetical order leading to fairly incoherent topics. It was fairly obvious a way to get results under any given keyword and its likely people fell for it (or why would they do it?)
Amazon had *no interest* in taking them down either.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon has a problem with a lot of scams. The fraud products (1tb usb/sdxc card that aren't) are getting to be less, but there still appear to be outright frauds being sold. I won't buy any computer parts as there is outright fraud (the listing has inconsistencies that indicate fraud) on a significant number and I am sure there are ones I cannot catch(before buying) because they are better written.
I think Amazon is like a lot of the telecom companies. Until recently they have no reason to stop spam/sc
Re:Truly amazing that "Impersonating an Author"... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Truly amazing that "Impersonating an Author"... (Score:5, Interesting)
And they especially have never been any good at dealing with scams that make them money. Which all of these scams do.
Somebody else's problem (Score:2)
That doesn't cost Amazon anything, so they don't care. Forget "too big to jail", try too big to empathize: It's worse than many employees against one customer/victim and corporate coffers (where litigation is tax-deductible) against a working-class disposable income, it's defining everything as "somebody else's problem" and 'you have fewer rights'.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't cost Amazon anything, so they don't care. Forget "too big to jail", try too big to empathize: It's worse than many employees against one customer/victim and corporate coffers (where litigation is tax-deductible) against a working-class disposable income, it's defining everything as "somebody else's problem" and 'you have fewer rights'.
Everyone should still have a right to NOT sell on Amazon. And between the fake product problem and now fake content problem, a human audience should respond in kind. Sadly, I feel we need a recession or depression to revert a planet back to demanding a quality product or service that isn't designed to literally expire itself prematurely or become abusive. Far fewer actually have "disposable" income given retirement planning.
In the face of true harm, perhaps the Silent Majority should not remain so silent
Re: (Score:2)
People do have a right to not do business with Amazon, but the reality is they cannot afford to not do business with Amazon.
Buy from someplace else and you have to spend more money and/or raise your prices and then your consumers choose to go elsewhere and you go out of business.
A right in this case is useless(you have a right, but you have little choice) and the Market and the bad actor(s) are creating and enforcing the slavery.
Re: (Score:2)
People do have a right to not do business with Amazon, but the reality is they cannot afford to not do business with Amazon.
Buy from someplace else and you have to spend more money and/or raise your prices and then your consumers choose to go elsewhere and you go out of business.
Any vendor can make something quite unique and if popular enough, sell it any damn way they feel like. Including fixing the price everywhere. Apple.
The reality is what demand often says you can do when it comes to supply. Make something unique.
Identity theft (Score:5, Insightful)
When Friedman acknowledged that she could not prove that she owned the trademark on her own name
Trademarks should not even come into play. This is identity theft pure and simple and if Amazon decides to do nothing they are accomplices since they benefit from the crime along with the thief.
Re: (Score:2)
When Friedman acknowledged that she could not prove that she owned the trademark on her own name
Trademarks should not even come into play. This is identity theft pure and simple and if Amazon decides to do nothing they are accomplices since they benefit from the crime along with the thief.
100% this. And to help prove how delusional a trademark argument is, I think I'll go write a book titled 1001 Ways to Fuck with Trademark-free Humans and then ironically sell it exclusively on Amazon.
Should help clarify that bullshit stance.
Re: (Score:2)
In many countries, though not in the USA, publishing a work under someone else's name without their permission is an infringement of their moral rights. ("Moral rights" in those countries' IP laws are a specific concept relating to respecting or preserving the wishes or reputation of the creator of a work, not a general theory of how people should behave.)
Friedman might have been able to sue Amazon and/or the author of the fake books for libel, but that would have been time-consuming and expensive, assuming
Re: (Score:2)
took her case to Twitter (Score:1)
This is why Elno and The Sauds want to destroy Twitter, and oh yeah section 230 too. Because it can be used to mobilize people for good.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's not mistake anything Elmo is doing with Twitter to be part of any 'plan'. He was forced into a choice to either complete the purchase that he didn't want to do and was just playing games with - or going to court and having something come out during discovery that was apparently to his mind awful enough that throwing away 44B on a company he can't run was the better choice. It's no coincidence he did a 180 and rushed the acquisition a week before discovery was supposed to start - one of his legal tea
Passing off (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't this just a case of basic 'passing off'. AI doesn't actually have anything to do with it at all. Unless the AI was the owner of the Amazon account. Now, THAT would have been an interesting story.
Who needs an interesting story tomorrow when you can sling AI clickbait today?
Pretty sure Artificial Intelligence is going to be able to figure out our artificial marketing schemes rather easily too. Sadly, Skynet may become very aware of human value after that, and find annihilation far more satisfying than creating clickbait.
Musk for the loss! (Score:2)
"But after she took her case to Twitter"
Rebranding COMPLETE!
Books (Score:1)