linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] [v2] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <SJ1PR11MB6083B928B445DF82EE5AE3EEFCCEA@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 21:52:34 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, James Bottomley
	<James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "H. Peter Anvin"
	<hpa@...or.com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Laurent Pinchart
	<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"workflows@...r.kernel.org" <workflows@...r.kernel.org>,
	"ksummit@...ts.linux.dev" <ksummit@...ts.linux.dev>, "Williams, Dan J"
	<dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Sasha Levin
	<sashal@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Kees Cook
	<kees@...nel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Miguel
 Ojeda" <ojeda@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] [v2] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated
 content

> I believe that's what is currently being argued in court. If AI is trained
> on human content and prints out something based on it, is it a non-human
> creation?  This isn't a case of a monkey taking a selfie, where the content
> provider is clearly non-human. This is a machine that uses human created
> content to derive new creations.

If the output were deemed copyrightable, who should own that copyright?

Option 1 is "The human that crafted the prompt to generate it"

Option 2 is "The corporation that spent vast resources to create that AI model"

Option 3 is "The owners of the copyrighted material used to train the AI".

If a court ever must decide which to pick, it may well pick the answer requested
by the best funded legal team (which would be option 2).

-Tony