Artificial intelligence wants to inhale my Montana book

By Writers on the Range

Recently, my publisher told me that a major technology company involved in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) wants to use my book, Stories from Montana’s Enduring Frontier, “for AI training purposes.”

I would earn, the representative explained, $340 for “this one-time use.” Is that one-time use like a wet wipe—disposable, expendable, easily sacrificed?

Stories from Montana’s Enduring Frontier collected 20 years’ worth of my essays to argue that 20th-century Montanans developed unique views of how nature worked, as captured in the wilderness-adventure and resource-extraction connotations of “the frontier.” The book felt particularly foreign to anything in the world of AI.

All the writers I know feel particularly vulnerable to AI. Most of today’s commercial AI programs are “large language models,” with skills not in logic, reasoning or math but merely in generating text. That directly threatens writers’ jobs.

Worse, replacing a human writer with today’s generative AI is like replacing a wild raspberry with an artificially flavored Crystal Light. The error-filled, uncreative products of AI threaten not only writers but also the joy and usefulness of reading.

While most people fulminate abstractly about AI, this query about buying my book presented a clear choice, sharpened by the specificity of “$340.” If I took the offer, would the knowledge I poured into these essays become available from an AI, decimating my book sales? If my royalties thus fell to zero because I had signed a death warrant for a book-that-is-like-a-child-to-me —was the $340 worth it? 

Perhaps $340 was better than nothing. Many technology companies train AI models by stealing from authors. Stories from Montana’s Enduring Frontier was among four of my books pirated for the “LibGen” database, which was used to educate AI programs from Anthropic and Meta. Although Anthropic recently settled a resulting lawsuit, Meta and others may yet escape punishment.

What is the proper value of my book? Although $340 is not much compensation for all the work I put in, neither is a royalty of $1.19 per book sold. If my main goal was adequate market compensation for my writing, I probably shouldn’t have published a book in the first place. The book is now 12 years old. At current sales rates, it would take a few years to make $340 in royalties.

When I talked with friends about this dilemma, it felt like none of us knew how to think about the situation. Maybe, as with previous technologies, making the book more widely available will stimulate sales—or maybe not. Maybe AI will thwart young people’s ability to engage in intellectual careers—or maybe its perils are overhyped.

Maybe AI will swallow my entire output without fair compensation—we know that Anthropic and Meta have already tried.

My publisher wouldn’t say which AI company made the offer, how it arrived at that take-it-or-leave-it price, or how it would use my book. Would I feel differently about the deal if AI contributed to the world’s knowledge rather than merely helping students cheat?

As I thought about this, I realized I was reflecting a distinctly human desire, rather than an AI desire. A large language model consumes a book as data. Its model requires ever more data to predict what the next word in a sentence should be.

It’s certainly ego-deflating to think of the product of my research, extensive reading, interviewing, thinking and finally writing as “data.” I’d prefer it to be “knowledge” or even “wisdom” that the AI wants to suck from me. I’d prefer to think that it needs my well-told stories, my keen insights, my brilliant larger points.

But AI doesn’t think in such big-picture terms. It just predicts a word, and then another word, and then another. I realized that this is also a model for how nature works. There’s no grand plan. No knowledge. No story with a satisfying ending. There’s just a single cell reproducing. One leaf reaching for sunlight. A predator seeking its next dinner.

John Clayton writes in Montana and is a contributor to Writers on the Range, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West, writersontherange.org. Read his newsletter at naturalstories.substack.com.

This column was published in the following newspapers:

10/08/2025 Glenwood Post Independent Glenwood Springs CO
10/08/2025 Whitehall Ledger Whitehall MT
10/08/2025 Salt Lake Tribune Salt Lake City UT
10/19/2025 Rapid City Journal Rapid City SD
10/18/2025 Greeley Tribune Greeley CO
10/09/2025 Trinidad Chronicle News Trinidad CO
10/15/2025 Three Forks Voice Three Forks MT
10/08/2025 Aspen Daily News Aspen CO
10/08/2025 Montrose Daily Press Montrose CO
10/11/2025 Daily Interlake Kalispell MT
10/16/2025 Wyoming Tribune Eagle Cheyenne WY
10/09/2025 Taos News Taos NM
09/19/2025 Greeley Tribune Greeley CO
09/08/2025 Helena Independent Record Helena MT
10/08/2025 Idaho Statesman Boise ID
10/08/2025 Durango Telegraph Durango CO
10/07/2025 MSN.COM Seattle WA
10/08/2025 Vail Daily Vail CO
10/16/2025 Missoulian Missoula Montana
10/08/2025 Grand Junction Daily Sentinel Grand Junction CO
10/22/2025 Montrose Local Lens Montrose CO
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Eric
28 days ago

Remember Lewis Carroll’s famous poem “The Walrus and the Carpenter.”
“The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of many things…”

Guess who is the Walrus and who are the oysters in this drama. Don’t get eaten.
cheers-

Phil White
28 days ago

I am also an author, based in Evergreen, Colorado. This is typical of unaccountable Big Tech billionaires like Zuck. They do not care about whit about your intellectual property or writing, but rather about their bottom line. We must all club together and get some sort of standards in place to prevent large-scale intellectual property theft. I’m mates with the likes of Peter Heller and Francine Mathews – we should have a Colorado and Montana chapter of something like the National Author Rights Preservation Society. My mates at The Center for Humane Technology can help. I’m not kidding. Thanks for your thoughtful article.

Ellen Taylor
20 days ago

Really curious what you decided. Bloomsbury Publishing wanted me to “opt-in” to a blanket licensing agreement with unspecified AI companies – I’d get 20% (of what I don’t quite know) and they’d get 80%. After consulting with the Authors Guild folks, I declined the offer. The book was written by my late husband and I have gone through the whole, “Maybe it will make the book more available and that would be a good thing,” versus “Maybe its a complete rip-off.” I don’t know. One possibility is the “Created by Humans” licensing platform that Authors Guild is partnering with. I plan to check it out.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Once a week you’ll receive an email with a link to our weekly column along with profiles of our writers, beside quirky photos submitted from folks like you. Don’t worry we won’t sell our list or bombard you with daily mail.

3
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x