Would you ever read a novel written by a computer?

The first publications of books entirely written by artificial intelligence based on human prompts date back to 2018, created by software that contributes to drafting a "soulless" text, including AI Novel Writer, Jasper AI, ChatGPT, and Sudowrite. The relentless effort of humans lies in perfecting the ideal algorithm that can replace an author’s pen. Memories of an AI, for example, is the first autobiography entirely written by artificial intelligence: a true testimony and a comprehensive explanation of the progress that technology is making in the field of literature. In most cases, texts produced by an automated machine undergo no modifications and are created in a short time— Bridging the AI Gap, by the Mumbai-based company Fluid AI, was written in just three days. On Amazon, there has been a significant influx of books generated by software, which are not limited to explanatory manuals on new frontiers of technological innovation, such as The Chatbot Revolution. Books like Death of an Author, which takes its title from Roland Barthes' essay, is an experimental narrative that draws inspiration from one of Margaret Atwood's novels. There are also practical travel guides, with France Travel Guide ranking among the top search results for words like “travel” and “France” on the American shopping platform in 2023.

But what happens in terms of intellectual property in an era where readers’ trust in an author can be undermined by the spread of automated content? The Authors Guild, one of the most authoritative American associations for the protection of writers, is taking action with the launch of "Human Authored Certification": through the portal, writers can register their books and use a logo on the cover or promotional materials to certify the authenticity of the work and ensure its legal protection. Among its goals, in addition to readjusting quality standards, is also limiting the production of texts similar to existing ones. In this regard, in 2023, the Authors Guild initiated legal action against OpenAI for alleged copyright infringement, arguing that the company was using protected works to train its language models. The literary community has united in this battle to defend authors: James Patterson has financially supported the case, along with Suzanne Collins, Jonathan Franzen, and George R.R. Martin. «Millions of copyrighted books, articles, essays, and poems provide the ‘food’ for AI systems, endless meals for which no bill has been presented,» reads the letter addressed to OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft. «You are spending billions of dollars developing AI technology. It is only fair that you compensate us for using our writings, without which AI would be trivial and extremely limited.»

The authenticity of books written by human authors may soon be verifiable by anyone, thanks to a publicly accessible portal currently in development. The Authors Guild, founded in 1912 in the United States, brings together a universe of “word creatives” such as novelists, journalists, poets, and translators and has been promoting freedom of expression and providing copyright support for over a hundred years. Trust, transparency, and ethics are increasingly relevant issues in a landscape where creativity needs to be verified, amid an ongoing debate between human and machine components. Human Authored is not just a label but a strong signal of the changing times, a cultural manifesto, and a collective stance by all writers. Even the field of translation is wavering: according to a survey conducted in 2024 by the Society of Authors (SoA) in the UK, the intellectual capabilities of more than a third of translators have been replaced by generative AI. In this climate of uncertainty, the British union of writers, illustrators, and translators has confirmed the «urgent need» for government regulation of AI tools to ensure they are developed and used «ethically and legally» worldwide. What will the consequences be now that human storytelling requires verification through a seal, in a scenario that risks replacing expressive depth and empathy—traits of creative intellect—with content generated by a synthetic mind?