Friedman, J. (2026, March 24).
Jane Friedman.
If you primarily learn about generative AI and large language models from social media, or from the opinions of the average author, then it’s likely you are misinformed about it. Even agents and editors often misinform the larger community about how AI works, including the law surrounding AI.
This FAQ is drawn from the reporting and analysis I’ve written and published over the last couple years. It is intended as a judgment-free zone: no opinions, no advocacy, just the clearest available statement of what the law and courts currently say about AI, primarily in the United States. I also discuss known use of AI by publishers, editors, agents, and others in the industry.
It covers these topics:
- AI and traditional book publishers
- Disclosure of AI use + AI detection
- Proving or certifying human authorship
- Copyrighting AI-assisted work
- AI training and fair use
- AI licensing
I will keep this guide updated as new cases, rulings, and policies come to light. If you have a question about the facts or the law surrounding AI, please leave a comment. Comments about AI and its ethicality or morality will be deleted; that is not the purpose of this resource.
The usual disclaimer: This article does not constitute legal advice. Again, I must emphasize that laws and court rulings in this area are evolving rapidly.
I offer more personal guidance on AI issues here: Writers’ AI Fears Often Run Ahead of the Facts
Here is are a couple of thoughts:
As a psychologist and author, it is important to know that current U.S. copyright law protects human-authored work, but wholly AI-generated text is not copyrightable. Using AI for brainstorming, outlining, or light editing does not invalidate your copyright, but relying on it to draft core content means those specific passages lack legal protection. Major publishers increasingly require transparent disclosure of AI use, and while AI detection tools are imperfect, they are being actively adopted to flag heavily AI-assisted manuscripts. To protect your professional integrity and intellectual property, it is best to use AI strictly as a supplementary tool, rigorously verify any AI-assisted research or citations to avoid "hallucinations," and maintain clear documentation of your human writing process.
When negotiating publishing contracts, you retain the rights to your work, meaning publishers cannot legally license your book to train AI models without your explicit consent. The Authors Guild recommends negotiating for a 75–85% revenue split if such licensing occurs, and advises adding specific contract clauses that prohibit unauthorized AI training, AI-generated audiobook narration, or AI translations of your work. While the legal landscape around AI training on copyrighted works is still evolving through ongoing lawsuits, the current industry standard strongly favors author control. By proactively addressing AI use in your contracts and book acknowledgments, you can safeguard your professional legacy and ensure your work meets the ethical and academic standards expected in psychological publishing.
