Just over half (51%) of published novelists in the UK say that artificial intelligence is likely to end up entirely replacing their work as fiction writers, a new report from the University of Cambridge has found. Close to two-thirds (59%) of novelists say they know their work has been used to train AI Large Language Models (LLMs) without permission or payment. Over a third (39%) of novelists say their income has already taken a hit from generative AI, for example due to loss of other work that facilitates novel writing. Most (85%) novelists expect their future income to be driven down by AI. In new research for Cambridge's Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy (MCTD), Dr Clementine Collett surveyed 258 published novelists earlier this year, as well as 74 industry insiders - from commissioning editors to literary agents - to gauge how AI is viewed and used in the world of British fiction.*

This study examines the prompt fidelity of ChatGPT4o / DALL - E3 text - to - image visualisations by analysing whether anullributes explicitly specified in autogenously generated prompts are correctly rendered in the resulting images. Using two public - domain datasets comprising 200 visualisations of women working in the cultural and creative industries and 230 visualisations of museum curators, the study assessed accuracy across personal anullributes (age, hair), appearance (anullire, glasses), and paraphernalia (name tags, clipboards). While correctly rendered in most cases, DALL - E3 deviated from prompt specifications in 15.6% of all anullributes (n=710). Errors were lowest for paraphernalia, moderate for personal appearance, and highest for depictions of the person themselves, particularly age. These findings demonstrate measurable prompt - to - image fidelity gaps with implications for bias detection and model evaluation.

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) continues to grow daily, more exciting (and somewhat controversial) technology emerges every other day. As we see the advancements in AI, we see more and more people becoming skeptical of it. This paper explores the complications and confusion around the ethics of generative AI art. We delve deep into the ethical side of AI, specifically generative art. We step back from the excitement and observe the impossible conundrums that this impressive technology produces. Covering environmental consequences, celebrity representation, intellectual property, deep fakes, and artist displacement. Our research found that generative AI art is responsible for increased carbon emissions, spreading misinformation, copyright infringement, unlawful depiction, and job displacement. In light of this, we propose multiple possible solutions for these problems. We address each situation's history, cause, and consequences and offer different viewpoints. At the root of it all, though, the central theme is that generative AI Art needs to be correctly legislated and regulated.

According to Cloudflare there has been an explosion of AI bot activity. "AI Crawlers generate more than 50 billion requests to the Cloudflare network every day", the company wrote in March. And there is growing concern that some AI crawlers are disregarding existing protocols for excluding bots. In an effort to counter the worst offenders Cloudflare previously developed a system where the worst miscreants would be sent to a "Labyrinth" of web pages filled with AI generated junk. The new system attempts to use technology to protect the content of websites and to give sites the option to charge AI firms a fee to access it.

In a wide-ranging report analysing the benefits and threats posed by AI to the UK's film, TV, video game and visual special effects industries, the BFI also raises fears that automation will eliminate the entry-level jobs that bring in the next generation of workers. It says the "primary issue" facing the 125bn industry is the use of intellectual property (IP) to train generative AI models without payment to, or permission from, rights holders. The UK creative industries want to see an "opt-in" regime, forcing AI companies to seek permission and strike licensing deals before they can use content, and the government is currently in the process of considering what legislation to put in place. "AI offers significant opportunities for the screen sector such as speeding up production workflows, democratising content creation and empowering new voices," said Rishi Coupland, director of research and innovation at the BFI. "However, it could also erode traditional business models, displace skilled workers, and undermine public trust in screen content."

Peers voted by 221 to 116 on Wednesday to insist on an amendment to force AI companies to be transparent about what material they use to train their models. He added: "We will not let the government forget their promise to support our creative industries. We will not back down and we will not quietly go away. This is just the beginning." Resistance to the changes in the Lords has been led by Beeban Kidron, a cross-bench peer and film director, whose amendments have been repeatedly backed by the upper chamber.

The government stripped the transparency amendment, which was backed by peers in the bill's reading in the House of Lords last week, out of the draft text by invoking financial privilege, meaning there is no budget available for new regulations, during a Commons debate on Wednesday afternoon. There were 297 MPs who voted in favour of removing the amendment, while 168 opposed. The data protection minister, Chris Bryant, told MPs that although he recognised that for many in the creative industries this "feels like an apocalyptic moment", he did not think the transparency amendment delivered the required solutions, and he argued that changes needed to be completed "in the round and not just piecemeal". Lady Kidron said: "The government failed to answer its own backbenchers who repeatedly asked'if not now then when?' and the minister replied with roundtable reviews and spurious problems about technical solutions. It is for government to set the laws and incentivise companies to obey it not run roundtables trying to work out technical solutions that they are not fit to provide. "It is astonishing that a Labour government would abandon the labour force of an entire sector.

"We will lose an immense growth opportunity if we give our work away at the behest of a handful of powerful overseas tech companies and with it our future income, the UK's position as a creative powerhouse, and any hope that the technology of daily life will embody the values and laws of the United Kingdom," the letter says. Urging parliamentarians on all sides of the political spectrum and in both houses to support the change, the letter says: "We urge you to vote in support of the UK creative industries. Supporting us supports the creators of the future. Our work is not yours to give away." Spanning the worlds of music, theatre, film, literature, art and media, the more than 400 signatories include Elton John, Kazuo Ishiguro, Annie Lennox, Rachel Whiteread, Jeanette Winterson, the National Theatre and the News Media Association, which represents more than 800 news titles including the Guardian.

Artists including Paul McCartney and Tom Stoppard have thrown their weight behind a campaign against the changes in a series of high-level interventions. The government's commitments will be made in amendments to the data bill, which has become a vehicle for campaigners against the changes and is due to return to the Commons on Wednesday next week. The move has already been dismissed by critics. Ed Newton-Rex, a the British composer and prominent campaigner against the government proposals, said there was a "ton of evidence" showing the mooted changes were "terrible for creators". He added: "We don't need an impact assessment to tell us this."

A 2bn ( 1.6bn) British startup that uses artificial intelligence to generate realistic avatars has struck a licensing deal with the stock footage firm Shutterstock to help develop its technology. Synthesia will pay the US-based Shutterstock an undisclosed sum to use its library of corporate video footage to train its latest AI model. It expects that incorporating the clips into its model will produce even more realistic expressions, vocal tones and body language from the avatars. "Thanks to this partnership with Shutterstock, we hope to try out new approaches that will … increase the realism and expressiveness of our AI generated avatars, bringing them closer to human-like performances," said Synthesia. Synthesia uses human actors to generate digital avatars of people, which are then deployed by companies in corporate videos in a range of scenarios such as advising on cybersecurity, calculating water bills and how to communicate better at work.