Sul presupposto che cmq ricorra <riproduzione>, sarebbe  difficile individuare (in UE) un'eccezione.

Non invocabile direi l'art. 4 dir. Copyright 790 :

≪Articolo 4   Eccezioni o limitazioni ai fini dell'estrazione di testo e di dati

1.   Gli Stati membri dispongono un'eccezione o una limitazione ai diritti di cui all'articolo 5, lettera a), e all'articolo 7, paragrafo 1, della direttiva 96/9/CE, all'articolo 2 della direttiva 2001/29/CE, all'articolo 4, paragrafo 1, lettere a) e b), della direttiva 2009/24/CE e all'articolo 15, paragrafo 1, della presente direttiva per le riproduzioni e le estrazioni effettuate da opere o altri materiali cui si abbia legalmente accesso ai fini dell'estrazione di testo e di dati.

2.   Le riproduzioni e le estrazioni effettuate a norma del paragrafo 1 possono essere conservate per il tempo necessario ai fini dell'estrazione di testo e di dati.

3.   L'eccezione o la limitazione di cui al paragrafo 1 si applica a condizione che l'utilizzo delle opere e di altri materiali di cui a tale paragrafo non sia stato espressamente riservato dai titolari dei diritti in modo appropriato, ad esempio attraverso strumenti che consentano lettura automatizzata in caso di contenuti resi pubblicamente disponibili online.

4.   Il presente articolo non pregiudica l'applicazione dell'articolo 3 della presente direttiva≫.

Non so in usa (fair use, che ha ambito applicativo alquanto vasto?)

>>-----Messaggio originale-----

>>Da: Stefano Quintarelli <stefano@quintarelli.it>

>>Inviato: venerdì 29 settembre 2023 17:08

>>A: Lorenzo Albertini <lorenzoalbertini.vr@gmail.com>; 'Nexa' <nexa@server-

>>nexa.polito.it>

>>Oggetto: Re: [nexa] R: R: ‘Biggest act of copyright theft in history’: thousands

>>of Australian books allegedly used to train AI model | Australia news | The

>>Guardian

>>

>>grazie

>>

>>ma il punto focale del mio quesito non e' il training ma, prima del training, la

>>genesi dei testi usati per il training

>>

>>ciao, s.

>>

>>On 29/09/23 16:36, Lorenzo Albertini wrote:

>>> §§ 54-64della citazione in giudizio (facilmente reperibile ,_ad es.

>>>

>>qui_<https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=

>>&ved=2ahUKEwiDh_vygtCBAxX4SPEDHZlhAxMQFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A

>>%2F%2Fwww.classaction.org%2Fmedia%2Fauthors-guild-et-al-v-openai-inc-

>>et-al.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1tUMb6Gk10kZCsvoAo0PH6&opi=89978449>):

>>>

>>> <<54. Recent generative AI systems designed to recognize input text

>>> and generate

>>>

>>> output text are built on “large language models” or “LLMs.”

>>>

>>> 55. LLMs use predictive algorithms that are designed to detect

>>> statistical patterns in

>>>

>>> the text datasets on which they are “trained” and, on the basis of

>>> these patterns, generate

>>>

>>> responses to user prompts. “Training” an LLM refers to the process by

>>> which the parameters that

>>>

>>> define an LLM’s behavior are adjusted through the LLM’s ingestion and

>>> analysis of large

>>>

>>> “training” datasets.

>>>

>>> 56. Once “trained,” the LLM analyzes the relationships among words in

>>> an input

>>>

>>> prompt and generates a response that is an approximation of similar

>>> relationships among words

>>>

>>> in the LLM’s “training” data. In this way, LLMs can be capable of

>>> generating sentences,

>>>

>>> paragraphs, and even complete texts, from cover letters to novels.

>>>

>>> 57. “Training” an LLM requires supplying the LLM with large amounts of

>>> text for

>>>

>>> the LLM to ingest—the more text, the better. That is, in part, the

>>> large in large language model.

>>>

>>> 58. As the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has observed, LLM

>>> “training” “almost

>>>

>>> by definition involve[s] the reproduction of entire works or

>>> substantial portions thereof.”4

>>>

>>> 59. “Training” in this context is therefore a technical-sounding

>>> euphemism for

>>>

>>> “copying and ingesting.”

>>>

>>> 60. The quality of the LLM (that is, its capacity to generate

>>> human-seeming responses

>>>

>>> to prompts) is dependent on the quality of the datasets used to “train” the

>>LLM.

>>>

>>> 61. Professionally authored, edited, and published books—such as those

>>> authored by

>>>

>>> Plaintiffs here—are an especially important source of LLM “training” data.

>>>

>>> 62. As one group of AI researchers (not affiliated with Defendants)

>>> has observed,

>>>

>>> “[b]ooks are a rich source of both fine-grained information, how a

>>> character, an object or a scene

>>>

>>> looks like, as well as high-level semantics, what someone is thinking,

>>> feeling and how these

>>>

>>> states evolve through a story.”5

>>>

>>> 63. In other words, books are the high-quality materials Defendants

>>> want, need, and

>>>

>>> have therefore outright pilfered to develop generative AI products

>>> that produce high-quality

>>>

>>> results: text that appears to have been written by a human writer.

>>>

>>> 64. This use is highly commercial.>>.

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________

>>>

>>> Le informazioni contenute nella presente comunicazione e nei documenti

>>> ad essa allegati potrebbero essere tutelate dal segreto professionale

>>> e sono comunque confidenziali e ad uso esclusivo del destinatario

>>> sopra indicato. Qualora la presente comunicazione non fosse destinata

>>> a Voi, Vi preghiamo di tener presente che la divulgazione,

>>> distribuzione o riproduzione di qualunque informazione contenuta nella

>>> presente comunicazione o nei documenti ad essa allegati sono vietate.

>>> Se avete ricevuto la presente comunicazione per errore, Vi preghiamo di

>>volerci avvertire immediatamente e di distruggere quanto ricevuto senza

>>leggerlo. Grazie per la collaborazione.

>>>

>>>

>>> The information contained in this email and any documents attached to

>>> it may be legally privileged and confidential. The information is

>>> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If

>>> you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any

>>> use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of any information

>>> contained in or attached to this email is prohibited. If you have

>>> received this email in error, please immediately notify us by reply email or by

>>telephone, and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without

>>reading them. Thank you.

>>>

>>>>>-----Messaggio originale-----

>>>

>>>>>Da: nexa <nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it> Per conto di Rossana

>>>

>>>>>Morriello

>>>

>>>>>Inviato: venerdì 29 settembre 2023 16:08

>>>

>>>>>A: Nexa <nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>

>>>

>>>>>Oggetto: [nexa] R: ‘Biggest act of copyright theft in history’:

>>>>>thousands of

>>>

>>>>>Australian books allegedly used to train AI model | Australia news |

>>>>>The

>>>

>>>>>Guardian

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>Non sono una giurista ma credo che questa rassegna possa essere utile

>>>>>alla

>>>

>>>>>discussione

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>https://www.thefashionlaw.com/from-chatgpt-to-deepfake-creating-

>>apps-

>>>>>a-<https://www.thefashionlaw.com/from-chatgpt-to-deepfake-creating-

>>ap

>>>>>ps-a-running-list-of-key-ai-lawsuits/>

>>>

>>>>>running-list-of-key-ai-lawsuits/

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>Saluti

>>>

>>>>>Rossana Morriello

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>-----Messaggio originale-----

>>>

>>>>>Da: nexa

>>>>><nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa-bounces@server-

>>nexa.p

>>>>>olito.it>>

>>> Per conto di Stefano

>>>

>>>>>Quintarelli

>>>

>>>>>Inviato: venerdì 29 settembre 2023 15:21

>>>

>>>>>Cc: Nexa

>>>>><nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>>

>>>

>>>>>Oggetto: Re: [nexa] ‘Biggest act of copyright theft in history’:

>>>>>thousands of

>>>

>>>>>Australian books allegedly used to train AI model | Australia news |

>>>>>The

>>>

>>>>>Guardian

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>Ho una domanda per i giuristi (anzi, piu' di una)

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>per allenare un modello, ho bisogno di un file con la versione

>>>>>digitale di un

>>>

>>>>>testo.

>>>

>>>>>(cosnsidero ovviamente testi non PD, CC0, ecc.)

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>la versione digitale di un testo la posso ottenere da un ebook (gia'

>>>>>digitale),

>>>

>>>>>togliendo il probabile DRM.

>>>

>>>>>ma un ebook non e' unbene ma e' un servizio soggetto a licenza d'uso,

>>>>>quindi

>>>

>>>>>se non e'

>>>

>>>>>prevista nella licenza d'uso la facolta' di estrarre il testo

>>>>>digitale per allenarci un

>>>

>>>>>modello, mi sembra che ci sia gia' una violazione della licenza, per

>>>>>cui, credo,

>>>

>>>>>non possa essere usato come base di un allenamento, tanto piu' se il

>>>>>fine di

>>>

>>>>>tale allenamento e'

>>>

>>>>>commerciale (se vendo un servizio basato su quel modello).

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>se e' cosi', per allenare il mio modello  devo allora prednere il

>>>>>testo digitale

>>>

>>>>>facendo scan/ocr di un testo cartaceo.

>>>

>>>>>ma cio' e' possibile, se non erro, solo per uso personale e non commerciale.

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>se questo e' corretto, non mi pare ci sia un modo per prendere un

>>>>>testo digitale

>>>

>>>>>senza infrangere una licenza d'uso/copyright

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>dove e' la fallacia del ragionamento ?

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>grazie, s.

>>>

>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>On 29/09/23 15:00, Stefano Borroni Barale wrote:

>>>

>>>>> > Buongiorno lista,

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> >> L'idea che istruire un modello su dei testi coperti da copyright

>>>>> >> sia

>>>

>>>>> >> una violazione del suddetto copyright è altamente opinabile

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> > Fin qui, ho l'impressione che tutti i legali in lista concorderanno.

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> >> ragionamento è in realtà abbastanza semplice: se istruirsi su un

>>>

>>>>> >> testo ne violasse il copyright, saremmo tutti dei criminali.

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> > Ma siccome noi siamo umani e quello che produciamo non è - salvo i

>>>>> > discorsi

>>>

>>>>>dei politici(*) - ontologicamente identico alla produzione di esseri

>>>>>tecnici non

>>>

>>>>>viventi, logica vuole che quanto si applica a noi non possa

>>>>>applicarsi a un LLM,

>>>

>>>>>tanto quanto la legge sul copyright non si applica pedissequamente

>>>>>all'utilizzo

>>>

>>>>>di testi umani per creare modelli linguistici.

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> > Questo è il motivo per il quale tutti i tentativi di "proteggere

>>>>> > via copyright" il

>>>

>>>>>prodotto di software generativi sono falliti miseramente, e con

>>>>>motivazioni

>>>

>>>>>scritte in sentenze; che per il diritto credo abbiano un peso assai

>>>>>maggiore del

>>>

>>>>>sito di CC.

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> > La mia impressione è che la questione terrà impegnati legali,

>>>>> > informatici,

>>>

>>>>>filosofi e società ancora moooooolto a lungo.

>>>

>>>>> > SBB

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> > (*) Come sanno bene i bambini degli anni '80 che hanno giocato con

>>>

>>>>> > questo spassoso giocattolo:

>>>

>>>>> >https://www.enricodalbosco.it/giochi/tubolario/<https://www.enricod

>>>>> >albosco.it/giochi/tubolario/>

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> >

>>>

>>>>> > Di quei testi

>>>

>>>>> >> non c'è fisicamente traccia all'interno dei modelli, non viene

>>>

>>>>> >> copiato niente. I modelli sono un'opera trasformativa di quei

>>>>> >> testi,

>>>

>>>>> >> non derivativa.

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >> Lo argomenta molto bene Creative Commons:

>>>

>>>>> >>https://creativecommons.org/2023/02/17/fair-use-training-generativ

>>>>> >>e-a<https://creativecommons.org/2023/02/17/fair-use-training-gener

>>>>> >>ative-a>

>>>

>>>>> >> i/

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >> Detto questo, cito le parole di un altro autore, Jeff Jarvis:

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>>https://www.facebook.com/jeff.jarvis/posts/pfbid0LMFeqdTYoxnGHQAZ

>>wp5<

>>>>>https://www.facebook.com/jeff.jarvis/posts/pfbid0LMFeqdTYoxnGHQAZ

>>wp5H

>>>>>>

>>>

>>>>>H

>>>

>>>>> >> MmeeVqgMSjL2dkcwMcBojkb2cinBpgYTHyc7Fhq1B9NPl

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >> «I, for one, am not complaining about my books being in in large

>>>

>>>>> >> language model training sets. I write to enter ideas into public

>>>

>>>>> >> discourse. I prefer informed over ignorant AI. I believe it is

>>>>> >> fair

>>>

>>>>> >> use for anyone to read & use books for transformative work. In

>>>>> >> fact,

>>>

>>>>> >> I'd probably feel snubbed if my books were not there. I'm happy

>>>>> >> when

>>>

>>>>> >> they are in libraries. I'm fine that they're here.»

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >> Fabio

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >> Il giorno ven 29 set 2023 alle ore 07:52 Alberto Cammozzo via

>>>>> >> nexa

>>>

>>>>> >>nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>ha

>>scritto:

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >>>https://www.theguardian.com/australia-

>>news/2023/sep/28/australian

>>>>> >>>-<https://www.theguardian.com/australia-

>>news/2023/sep/28/australi

>>>>> >>>an-bo>

>>>

>>>>>bo

>>>

>>>>> >>> oks-training-ai-books3-stolen-pirated

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Thousands of books from some of Australia’s most celebrated

>>>>> >>> authors

>>>

>>>>>have potentially been caught up in what Booker prize-winning novelist

>>>>>Richard

>>>

>>>>>Flanagan has called “the biggest act of copyright theft in history”.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> The works have allegedly been pirated by the US-based Books3

>>>>> >>> dataset

>>>

>>>>>and used to train generative AI for corporations such as Meta and

>>Bloomberg.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Flanagan, who found 10 of his works, including the

>>>>> >>> multi-international

>>>

>>>>>award-winning 2013 novel The Narrow Road to the Deep North, on the

>>>

>>>>>Books3 dataset, told Guardian Australia he was deeply shocked by the

>>>

>>>>>discovery made several days ago.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “I felt as if my soul had been strip mined and I was powerless to stop

>>it,”

>>>

>>>>>he said in a statement.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “This is the biggest act of copyright theft in history.”

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> AI could ‘turbo-charge fraud’ and be monopolised by tech

>>>>> >>> companies,

>>>

>>>>> >>> Andrew Leigh warns

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> The Australian Publishers Association confirmed to Guardian

>>>>> >>> Australia on

>>>

>>>>>Wednesday that as many as 18,000 fiction and nonfiction titles with

>>>

>>>>>Australian ISBNs (unique international standard book numbers)

>>>>>appeared to

>>>

>>>>>be affected by the copyright infringement, although it is not yet

>>>>>clear what

>>>

>>>>>proportion of these are Australian editions of internationally authored

>>books.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “We’re still working through [the data] to work out the impact

>>>>> >>> in terms of

>>>

>>>>>Australian authors,” APA spokesperson Stuart Glover said.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “This is a massive legal and ethical challenge for the

>>>>> >>> publishing industry

>>>

>>>>>and for authors globally.”

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> A search tool published on Monday by US media platform The

>>>>> >>> Atlantic and

>>>

>>>>>uploaded by the US Authors Guild on Wednesday revealed the works of

>>>>>Peter

>>>

>>>>>Carey, Helen Garner, Kate Grenville, Anna Funder, Christos Tsiolkas

>>>>>and

>>>

>>>>>Thomas Keneally, as well as Flanagan and dozens of other high-profile

>>>

>>>>>Australian authors, were included in the pirated dataset containing

>>>>>more than

>>>

>>>>>180,000 titles.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> On Thursday, the Australian Society of Authors issued a

>>>>> >>> statement saying

>>>

>>>>>it was “horrified” to learn that the works of Australian writers were

>>>>>being used

>>>

>>>>>to train artificial intelligence without permission from the authors.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> ASA chief executive, Olivia Lanchester, described the Books3

>>>>> >>> dataset as

>>>

>>>>>piracy on an industrial scale.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “Authors appropriately feel outraged,” Lanchester said. “The

>>>>> >>> fact is this

>>>

>>>>>technology relies upon books, journals, essays written by authors,

>>>>>yet

>>>

>>>>>permission was not sought nor compensation granted.”

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Lanchester said the Australian literary industry, while not

>>>>> >>> objecting per se

>>>

>>>>>to emerging technologies such as AI, was deeply concerned about the

>>>>>lack of

>>>

>>>>>transparency evident in the development and monetisation of AI by

>>>>>global

>>>

>>>>>tech companies.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “Turning a blind eye to the legitimate rights of copyright

>>>>> >>> owners threatens

>>>

>>>>>to diminish already precarious creative careers,” she said.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “The enrichment of a few powerful companies is at the cost of

>>>>> >>> thousands

>>>

>>>>>of individual creators. This is not how a fair market functions.”

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Josephine Johnston, chief executive of Australia’s Copyright

>>>>> >>> Agency,

>>>

>>>>>described the Books3 development as “a free kick to big tech” at the

>>>>>expense

>>>

>>>>>of Australia’s creative and cultural life.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “We’re going to need greater transparency – how these tools have

>>>>> >>> been

>>>

>>>>>developed, trained, how they operate – before people can truly

>>>>>understand

>>>

>>>>>what their legal rights might be,” she said.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “We seem to be in this terrible position now where content

>>>>> >>> owners –

>>>

>>>>>remembering that the vast majority of them will be individual authors

>>>>>– may

>>>

>>>>>actually have to take out court cases to enforce their rights.”

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Australian copyright law protects creators of original content

>>>>> >>> from data

>>>

>>>>>scraping.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Litigation in the US against ChatGPT creator OpenAI over use of

>>>>> >>> allegedly

>>>

>>>>>pirated book datasets, Books1 and Books2 (which do not appear to be

>>>

>>>>>affiliated with Books3) has already commenced.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> In July, North American horror/fantasy writers Mona Awad (author

>>>>> >>> of

>>>

>>>>>Bunny) and Paul Tremblay (author of The Cabin at the End of the

>>>>>World) filed a

>>>

>>>>>lawsuit in a San Francisco federal court, alleging ChatGPT unlawfully

>>>>>digested

>>>

>>>>>their books as part of its AI training data.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> On 28 August, OpenAI filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit,

>>>>> >>> arguing that

>>>

>>>>>the authors “misconceive the scope of copyright, failing to take into

>>>>>account

>>>

>>>>>the limitations and exceptions (including fair use) that properly

>>>>>leave room for

>>>

>>>>>innovations like the large language models now at the forefront of

>>>>>artificial

>>>

>>>>>intelligence”.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> On 19 September the Writers Guild and 17 of its members,

>>>>> >>> including

>>>

>>>>>bestselling novelists John Grisham, George RR Martin and Jodi

>>>>>Picoult, filed a

>>>

>>>>>complaint in a New York district court against OpenAI, seeking

>>>>>redress for

>>>

>>>>>“flagrant and harmful infringements” of guild members’ registered

>>copyrights.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> In a statement on its website, the guild says while it is aware

>>>>> >>> that

>>>

>>>>>companies such as Meta and Bloomberg have used the Books3 dataset to

>>>

>>>>>train their LLMs, it is not yet clear whether OpenAI is using Books3

>>>>>to train its

>>>

>>>>>ChatGPT models GPT 3.5 or GPT 4.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Democracies face ‘truth decay’ as AI blurs fact and fiction,

>>>>> >>> warns

>>>

>>>>> >>> head of Australia’s military

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Guardian Australia has sought comment from OpenAI, which has yet

>>>>> >>> to

>>>

>>>>>officially respond to the guild’s complaint, and Meta.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> On 4 September, US technology magazine Wired reported that a

>>>>> >>> Danish

>>>

>>>>>anti-piracy group called Rights Alliance had been told by Bloomberg

>>>>>that the

>>>

>>>>>company did not plan to train future versions of its BloombergGPT

>>>>>using

>>>

>>>>>Books3.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Bloomberg declined to respond to the Guardian’s queries.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> The APA said the global nature of the issue would present

>>>>> >>> significant

>>>

>>>>>challenges in enforcement and prosecution, and has joined the authors’

>>>

>>>>>society in calling for AI technologies to be regulated.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Consultation closed last month for a Department of Industry,

>>>>> >>> Science and

>>>

>>>>>Resources discussion paper on supporting responsible AI.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> A parliamentary inquiry is under way examining the use of

>>>>> >>> generative

>>>

>>>>>artificial intelligence in the Australian education system.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> Flanagan said it was up to the Australian government to act to

>>>>> >>> protect

>>>

>>>>>Australia’s writers.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “It has power and we do not,” he said.

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> “If it cares for our culture it must now stand up and fight for it.”

>>>

>>>>> >>>

>>>

>>>>> >>> _______________________________________________

>>>

>>>>> >>> nexa mailing list

>>>

>>>>> >>>nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>

>>>

>>>>> >>>https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa<https

>>>>> >>>://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>

>>>

>>>>> >>

>>>

>>>>> >> _______________________________________________

>>>

>>>>> >> nexa mailing list

>>>

>>>>> >>nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>

>>>

>>>>> >>https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa<https:

>>>>> >>//server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>

>>>

>>>>> > _______________________________________________

>>>

>>>>> > nexa mailing list

>>>

>>>>> >nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>

>>>

>>>>> >https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa<https:/

>>>>> >/server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>

>>>

>>>>>_______________________________________________

>>>

>>>>>nexa mailing list

>>>

>>>>>nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>

>>>

>>>>>https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa<https://s

>>>>>erver-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa>

>>>

>>>>>_______________________________________________

>>>

>>>>>nexa mailing list

>>>

>>>>>nexa@server-nexa.polito.it<mailto:nexa@server-nexa.polito.it>

>>>

>>>>>https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa<https://s