Stealing Minds and Destroying Morale: LibGen, Meta, and AI

Last week I learned that all four of the books for which I am sole author, or co-author, were illegally pirated by Library Genesis (LibGen). The LibGen database was in turn scraped illegally by Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, for the purpose of training the company’s AI (Artificial Intelligence) program in use of the English language. How many literary works were compromised? What recourse do authors have? Why is this a problem? Go make the popcorn and brace yourself.

I am not alone in having my works taken illegally, without notification, without my consent, and certainly without compensation. An estimated 7.5 million books, articles, and scientific papers are on the LibGen website. Nearly all of my writer and science friends, and even their parents, are victims of this intellectual property theft. If you have ever had anything published, you need to search LibGen.

Thankfully, The Atlantic magazine provides a search tool, for free, in the top left corner of the page in this hyperlink. Use it. Search for the names of people you know, and notify them if their works appear.

If you are not already a member of the Authors Guild, I strongly recommend becoming one. This particular case is high profile, but only the tip of the iceberg. There are many other piracy platforms that provide free access to literature without compensating the author or the publisher. Authors Guild has a strong legal team that fights for the rights of authors against copyright violations, against book bans, against publishing scams aimed at newbie authors, and many other issues including slow payment and non-payment by publishers.

You may hear from various sources that LibGen is actually the “good guy,” and it is only Meta that is at fault in this case. Publishing is a complicated industry, its landscape changing almost daily. One argument I saw praising LibGen involves the fact it “archives” ebooks, which became even more important after February 26, 2025. On that date, Amazon made it impossible to download ebooks from Kindle to your computer, or any device over which you have control of the files. The fact that you can fetch them from LibGen does not let that pirating company off the hook, it simply punishes Amazon and the authors of those ebooks.

Most publishers of scientific journals truly are evil, though. First, the author pays page fees to have their work published. Then, the publisher puts those papers behind a paywall that essentially shuts off access to the general public. I confess that without the “services” provided by the kin of LibGen, I would have extraordinary difficulty in conducting research for my own books. I simply do not have the time to contact the author of a given paper, provided they are still alive, with a public email address, and ask them if they can provide me with a PDF of the paper I am seeking. God forbid that capitalism could keep its dirty fingers out of the pie of collective knowledge we should all be able to access, and that authors should not have to pay to publish.

Back to the current issue for a moment. What can authors do? Class action lawsuits against Meta are in the works, and I will likely let Authors Guild and the law firms do the heavy lifting on the behalf of us authors. AG also has a ”What Authors Need to Know” page listing additional courses of action, including a template for a letter you can send to Z-man, the CEO of Meta, to express your outrage, and/or concern. If your life can function without Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, you may want to consider alternative social media like Bluesky.

Why is all of this a problem? Authors and writers are already compensated precious little for what we produce. Many of us never see royalties, and “advances” ahead of publishing are becoming more of a rarity all the time. This devaluation of our skill set, imagination, and creativity is something we already suffer, without the added attacks of piracy and plagiarism, and the indignity of being replaced by AI tools.

I came across a YouTube video above, by Del Stone, Jr., that captures perfectly my own sentiments. The view that intellectual property is not worthy of respect, but instead something to be “harvested” and used against creative people in the future is demoralizing AF, as the kids these days would say. What these corporations are doing is robbing people like me of the desire to continue creating content, and stimulating critical thinking by our readers.

You wonder why I rail against capitalism on this blog? Now you have some idea. I can no longer promise new posts here, or over at my Bug Eric blog. What is the point? Why should I continue to provide free fodder for AI machines? I’m open to persuasion, but for now I may stick to putting out a book every so often, and doing the odd article for the few editors I treasure. Thank you, and good luck.

The Media

© MadMikesAmerica.com

What a difference a couple of months makes. When I first drafted my concept for this post, "fake news" was not a....thing; and the war on the press waged by our President-elect had not yet manifested itself. I will not speak to either of these topics, instead staying with my original intent, which is again aimed mostly at local and regional television, radio, and print media. As consumers, we need to hold our local outlets responsible for their conduct and priorities.

Seek responsible advertisers. Just as the consumer has a choice in which companies he or she wants to do business with, so networks and newspapers can choose which advertisers reflect socially and environmentally responsible ethics, while making quality products or providing quality services. The media endorse certain businesses through an agreement to allow them to advertise. At the same time, the press is the first line of defense for consumers in the face of inferior products, services, and ethics. This responsibility should extend beyond reporting product recalls and indictments of CEOS, and investigative reporting that exposes wrongdoing. The media must decline advertising revenue from such businesses.

Empower consumers. The above paragraph demonstrates how the media can empower consumers, but they also need to be more creative in how to do so. Maybe the new version of "reality television" will be to follow lab workers at the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Bringing back Mythbusters couldn't hurt anything, either. The challenge lies in making informative material entertaining. Right now we have a surplus of "empty calories" of entertainment with no purpose other than escapism.

Increase public service announcements. The Ad Council is one of the most underrated, underutilized, and no doubt underfunded organizations in the U.S. Go to their website and you will see some public service announcements you recognize, and an awful lot you have never seen before. That is probably in part the fault of your local media. Ask them to print and air more of these. Meanwhile, suggest your own issues to the Ad Council, and include resources where they can learn more and get ideas for building a message campaign. We cannot make a difference if we are unaware of issues, or do not know where to go to help change a situation.

Diversify for real. The media is getting better at projecting ethnic and lifestyle diversity that reflects our evolving cultural makeup, but that is not what I mean by "diversify." The media is the most glaring example of what comedian George Carlin described as the "illusion of choice." Think you have a huge number of choices in your cable or satellite television package? Think again. Most of those "networks" are subsidiaries of an enormous conglomerate. The "Disney family of networks," for example. There is constant duplication of content, and most of the new or live content is going into the networks you must pay for access to. Meanwhile, the newsstand is full of self-help, diet, food, celebrity, and "lifestyle" magazines, most of which are light on content and heavy (literally) in advertising.

© MadMikesAmerica.com

Be Your Own Media. Back in the day, you could produce your own television show through public access, a community-based resource that allowed citizens to learn television production skills and use studio equipment free of charge to air their programs. By 2009, public access had largely faded away or, more to the point, been driven into the ground by media corporations eager to again turn everything into a profit-making venture. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) largely endorsed this, as it has endorsed the mega-mergers that have left consumers with fewer and fewer media choices. Today, YouTube and its descendents have become the new personal channels; and blogs have become the new printed media, albeit you have to print them yourself. Most of these personal endeavors are not local, either, and that is what public access was all about. It may be time to resurrect that medium.

Consumers are increasingly left to their own devices in assessing what is truth, what is fiction, what is propaganda. I wish I could see it getting better, but for the time being we must practice mindful consumption of what passes for information. We must view everything through the filtering question of "who benefits from this?" Follow the money, indeed.