Under copyright law, consent is always required from the rights holders. For a submitted manuscript, this is the author. In addition, for a few years now there has been the option of an extended collective license from ProLitteris, in the interest of legal certainty and at moderate cost.
Publishing houses that have submitted manuscripts «read» by an AI also require consent. An unpublished manuscript is also protected by copyright. The use of a manuscript in an AI system involves a reproduction by uploading and possibly a processing for the purpose of summarization or analysis.
Depending on the AI system and the terms of use, the work may even leave the private sphere of the author and the publishing house, which constitutes a publication. This is because the Copyright Act defines publication as any act by which the work leaves the private sphere.
It is true that the Copyright Act (CopA) provides for general limitations on use (exceptions) for internal information and documentation as well as for software-supported research. However, according to the prevailing legal opinion, an AI analysis does not fall under any of these exceptions. The use of a manuscript in AI therefore requires the consent of the author.
Consent can be granted – and refused – in different forms. A written or oral agreement is conceivable or, in correspondence, an explicit statement by the publishing house or the author that is confirmed by the other party.
Depending on the circumstances, a unilateral statement that is not contradicted can be deemed to be implicitly accepted. A publishing house could therefore establish general rules on how it usually handles manuscripts and communicate these with the confirmation of receipt. Some publishing houses already have such manuscript processing rules on their website and cover AI-related questions.
As a precaution, the submitting person should be given the opportunity to object, in particular if the notice is not sufficiently well known and visible. For the time being, it is best if a publishing house draws the attention of the submitting authorship directly and openly to the AI use and reaches an understanding on this.
It is conceivable that a publishing house is of the opinion that the analysis of manuscripts is permissible as internal use or as research, or that the submission of a manuscript is associated with implicit consent. ProLitteris therefore recommends a clear and explicit arrangement between the parties, which also includes transparency about any disadvantages associated with an objection by the author.
Conversely, an author can request that a publishing house refrain from feeding the submitted manuscript into an AI system. This statement can be combined in the cover letter to the book publishing house with the assurance of authorship. A suggested wording: «I confirm that the authorship of the manuscript lies with me alone [and that I am entitled to use works and parts of works of third parties that appear in my manuscript], and that I have created the manuscript without the use of artificial intelligence [alternative addition: … beyond its use as a mere working tool]. All elements of the work have been written by me and all sources have been personally checked and cited by me. On the basis of my copyrights, I ask you to treat my manuscript as a copyright-protected work and not to use it in AI systems, even if this should be provided for under your terms or in your working methods. Thank you.»
ProLitteris is interested in learning about developments in publishing practice and is in contact with professional and industry associations.