Advocacy Groups Urge FTC Probe Into AI 'Hoard-and-Destroy' Book Practices

More than a dozen public interest and consumer advocacy groups are calling on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate leading AI developers for the systematic destruction of physical books. The groups allege that companies are engaging in a practice termed "hoard-and-destroy," where print materials are purchased in bulk, digitized for training large language models, and then discarded.

In a letter addressed to FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson and Commissioner Mark Meador, organizations including the Demand Progress Education Fund, the Consumer Federation of America, and the Institute for Local Self-Reliance argued that these actions may violate Section 5 of the FTC Act. This provision prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. The complaint follows a 404 Media investigation which reported that Amazon has been buying books in bulk to scan for AI training before destroying the physical copies.

The Shift from Copyright to Conservation

This regulatory push follows a period of intense legal scrutiny regarding how AI companies acquire training data. In 2024, writer Andrea Bartz and several other authors filed a copyright lawsuit against Anthropic, accusing the company of acquiring, scanning, and discarding millions of print books. However, the legal landscape shifted in June 2025 when a court ruled that Anthropic's digitization of legally purchased print books for training purposes constituted fair use and did not violate copyright law.

Because the courts have largely protected the act of digitization, advocates are now pivoting their focus. The current controversy is less about who owns the intellectual property and more about the physical destruction of nonrenewable cultural resources and the resulting anticompetitive market behavior.

The Risk of Knowledge Privatization

Advocates warn that if AI giants eliminate the physical source material they digitize, they could effectively become the sole gatekeepers of specific segments of human knowledge. By removing these resources from broader public access, the groups argue that companies are creating an insurmountable barrier to entry for smaller AI developers and the general public.

In their letter to the FTC, the Demand Progress Education Fund and its partners stated that AI companies are "engineering a future where only the wealthiest incumbents can build high-quality AI models and operate as the sole holders of humanity's written works — after having destroyed the originals to get there."

Future Outlook

The FTC has not yet announced whether it will open a formal investigation into these practices. If the commission finds that "hoard-and-destroy" tactics constitute an unfair method of competition, it could lead to new regulations on how AI companies handle physical media. For now, the industry remains in a gray area where the legality of the data use is established, but the ethics and legality of the physical disposal remain contested.