Writers and publishers need to band together to lobby against OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, fighting for proper compensation and a share of AI's value
https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... June Casagrande / @junecasagrande@mastodon.social : Damn right it needs to stop. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... [image] X: @nelsonmrosario : @WilliamCohan Excellent op-ed. As the body of authors grows the big cos are going to have to figure out some sort of royalty/revenue share that makes sense or suffer death by a thousand lawsuits. William D. Cohan / @williamcohan : AI is learning from stolen intellectual property. It needs to stop. Authors need to band together and put a stop to this https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Linda Monk / @lindarmonkjd : Unfortunately I'm in this group of authors, too. AI is learning from stolen intellectual property. It needs to stop. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Anne Nelson / @anelsona : “Time to stop AI from stealing writers' words” — as in 3 of my 4 books. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... @jeffjarvis : @charlesarthur We have Elon and his latest stupid idea to thank for this. Yes, since he eliminated headlines, I include them so you can know what I'm reacting to. Charles Arthur / @charlesarthur : @jeffjarvis Just for absolute clarity, Jeff, the first part of your tweet is what you actually think, yes? The second part is just the headline of the article (which you disagree with)? Jane Mayer / @janemayernyer : Whoa! My books - and many others- are being pirated by AI - no permission asked or granted! https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... @jeffjarvis : The entitlement of the writer. How do journalists ply their trade? By reading others, talking to others, quoting others, learning from others...and not paying any of them, either. AI is learning from stolen intellectual property. It needs to stop. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Neil Turkewitz / @neilturkewitz : AI is learning from stolen intellectual property. It needs to stop. “This is wholly unacceptable behavior. Our books are copyrighted material, not free fodder for wealthy companies to use as they see fit, without permission or compensation.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... @melissajpeltier : @JaneMayerNYer That's all AI really is - super sophisticated plagiarism, just from multitudes of sources. Time for massive class action suits...this can't continue. LinkedIn: Sandeep Mehta : Germane topic that was discussed in some forums recently; if IP restrictions limit training of #llm #models (open source or otherwise) …
Context & Ripple Effects
The call for collective action follows early creator resistance to data aggregation, including the writer backlash that shut down Prosecraft. It frames the dispute not only as unauthorized use, but as a claim on the economic value created from written work.
Related coverage also described AI-generated text as putting pressure on demand for human writing; the lobbying push seeks to connect that market effect to compensation from the companies building and deploying the systems.
First-order effects
- The named AI companies face more organized public pressure from writers and publishers to negotiate compensation or revenue-sharing terms for copyrighted material used in AI development.
- Writers and publishers gain a clearer shared advocacy agenda: treating training-data use and AI-derived value as collective rights issues rather than isolated creator complaints.
Second-order effects
- A coordinated rights campaign can increase the leverage behind copyright litigation and licensing talks, alongside the expected expansion of AI copyright lawsuits.
- Publishers and platforms may be pushed to define clearer permissions, attribution, and payment arrangements for material used in AI products, rather than leaving those questions to individual creators.
Third-order effects
- If collective advocacy translates into legal or commercial leverage, access to high-quality text could move from an assumed input into a licensed and compensated component of AI production.
- The underlying policy contest is whether copyright rules can allocate AI-created value back to creators without making litigation the default mechanism for setting market terms; mixed legal views on fair use leave that outcome unsettled.
The trend: This is part of the shift from open-ended web-data extraction toward negotiated rights, licensing, and compensation for AI content inputs.