zlacker

>>mjcl+(OP)
SJ mentions deep fakes.

It is quite possible that OpenAI has synthesized the voice from SJ material.

However If OpenAI can produce the woman who did is the current voice, and she has a voice nearly identical that of SJ would that mean OpenAI had done something wrong?

Does SJ since she is a celebrity hold a "patent" right to sound like her.

The more likely scenario is that they have hired a person and told her to try and imitate how SJ sounds.

What is the law on something like that?

>>ThinkB+26
The answer, based on two different court precedents (Bette Midler, Tom Waits), is that the company can't do that. Companies cannot hire soundalike people to advertise their products after the person with a distinctive voice they really wanted declined. Doesn't matter if they hired a soundalike and used her voice.

>>not2b+C8
If they are not trying to trick people into believing xyz person did the voice acting, and instead are going for a certain style, I think they would be protected by freedom of expression. Think of how authors of books describe voices in great detail.

i.e. intent matters.

In this case, since the other voice actor has a clearly different voice than SJ, it seems like their intent is to just copy the general 'style' of the voice, and not SJ's voice itself. Speculative though.

>>chipwe+6r
> In this case, since the other voice actor has a clearly different voice than SJ, it seems like their intent is to just copy the general 'style' of the voice, and not SJ's voice itself.

How can you say that when they literally approached SJ for her voice, and then asked the voice actor to reproduce SJ's voice?!

>>Ar-Cur+Er
> and then asked the voice actor to reproduce SJ's voice?!

you are just making that up afaict.

> How can you say that when they literally approached SJ for her voice

Almost by definition SJ's voice will match the style of 'Her', at least for awhile (*). So why not ask SJ first?

(*) voices change significantly over time.