Murphy accuses AI firms of destroying rare books for training
- Sen. Chris Murphy accuses AI firms of buying rare books, digitizing them, and destroying originals
- Murphy cites Anthropic's Project Panama, documented in court filings, as evidence of this practice
- He argues pre-2022 books are targeted because they are wholly human-created works
- Nvidia's Jensen Huang and OpenAI's Sam Altman emphasize AI will shift rather than replace human skills
- Murphy calls for congressional guard rails to slow the pace of AI innovation

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) accused artificial intelligence companies of undermining human creativity by acquiring rare books, digitizing their contents, and disposing of the physical originals.
Murphy Warns of AI Book Training
On Tuesday, Murphy posted on X a clip discussing what he described as a massive campaign by AI companies to acquire and digitize scarce books. He argued that while these companies claim their technology enhances human creativity, they are quietly destroying it.
In the video, Murphy alleged that AI companies are "literally buying up millions of books," including rare works with only one or a few remaining copies. He stated that after scanning these works, the companies dispose of them.
Anthropic’s Alleged Rare Book Project
Murphy specifically pointed to Anthropic and its "Project Panama," an effort documented in court filings. He described the project as involving the purchase of millions of physical books, the removal of their bindings, scanning of pages, and disposal of the originals.
Murphy raised concerns that such practices put scarce and potentially rare works at risk. He also claimed that AI companies are particularly interested in books created before 2022 because they represent work produced without AI assistance.
"These were wholly human-created works," he said, calling the alleged practice "especially perverse."
Murphy argued that destroying rare physical works could make it harder for future generations to access examples of original human creativity and distinguish them from AI-generated content.
He called for congressional action, suggesting lawmakers establish "common sense guard rails" around AI development. "The pace of this development, the pace of this innovation is frightening," he said, arguing that AI companies should operate "a little bit slower and a little bit more responsibly."
Industry Perspectives on AI and Creativity
Other industry leaders offered contrasting views on the impact of AI on work and creativity.
Kevin O’Leary stated that companies failing to adopt AI risk falling behind competitors. He noted that businesses increasingly use the technology for content creation, advertising, customer acquisition, and management. O’Leary said AI could significantly reduce production and creative costs while improving output, but emphasized the importance of human editing.
Nvidia Corp CEO Jensen Huang told parents not to focus on finding "AI-proof" fields for their children. He argued that skills such as storytelling, creativity, communication, and judgment would remain valuable. Huang encouraged students to learn how to use AI to enhance their work, stating that automation could shift workers toward higher-level tasks requiring human judgment.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman predicted that AI could surpass human intelligence by 2030, potentially making scientific discoveries humans could not make independently. He estimated that 30% to 40% of economic tasks could eventually be performed by AI. Altman urged people to develop adaptability, resilience, and the ability to keep learning as technology reshaped jobs.
What specific legislative measures might Congress propose to regulate the acquisition and digitization of physical books by AI companies?
How could the destruction of rare physical copies impact the valuation and insurance of rare book collections in the secondary market?
Will libraries and academic institutions face increased pressure to digitize their own holdings to compete with AI datasets, potentially accelerating the loss of physical archives?

































