Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Annotating patches containing AI-assisted code

[James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>]

On August 18, 2025 10:07:29 PM GMT+01:00, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org> wrote:
>Em Tue, 12 Aug 2025 07:42:21 -0700
>"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org> escreveu:
[...]
> do agree that many of the lawsuits seem to be motivated by an
>> overwhelmening desire to monetize the output of AI that was induced by
>> someone else's prompts, if that is what you are getting at.  It does seem
>> to me personally that after you have sliced and diced the training data,
>> fair use should apply, but last I checked, fair use was a USA-only thing.
>
>Maybe, but other Countries have similar concepts. I remember I saw an
>interpretation of the Brazilian copyright law once from a famous layer
>at property rights matter, stating that reproducing small parts of a book, 
>for instance, could be ok, under certain circumstances (in a concept
>similar to US fair use).

Yes, technically.  Article 10 of the Berne convention contains a weaker concept allowing quotations without encumbrance based on a three prong test that the quote isn't extensive,  doesn't rob the rights holder of substantial royalties and doesn't unreasonably prejudice the existing copyright rights.

Regards,

James


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.