zlacker

[return to "OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show"]
1. jmull+P12[view] [source] 2024-05-23 15:22:46
>>richar+(OP)
Well, here are some things that aren't really being disputed:

* OpenAI wanted an AI voice that sounds like SJ

* SJ declined

* OpenAI got an AI voice that sounds like SJ anyway

I guess they want us to believe this happened without shenanigans, but it's bit hard to.

The headline of the article is a little funny, because records can't really show they weren't looking for an SJ sound-alike. They can just show that those records didn't mention it. The key decision-makers could simply have agreed to keep that fact close-to-the-vest -- they may have well understood that knocking off a high-profile actress was legally perilous.

Also, I think we can readily assume OpenAI understood that one of their potential voices sounded a lot like SJ. Since they were pursuing her they must have had a pretty good idea of what they were going after, especially considering the likely price tag. So even if an SJ voice wasn't the original goal, it clearly became an important goal to them. They surely listened to demos for many voice actors, auditioned a number of them, and may even have recorded many of them, but somehow they selected one for release who seemed to sound a lot like SJ.

◧◩
2. pauldd+Mu2[view] [source] 2024-05-23 17:41:18
>>jmull+P12
I don't understand.

If you literally use SJ's image or voice, then you're in trouble.

If it's an SJ lookalike or soundalike (and you don't claim otherwise), there's no problem.

Right? What's the "shenanigans?"

◧◩◪
3. kopecs+tA2[view] [source] 2024-05-23 18:16:28
>>pauldd+Mu2
> If it's an SJ lookalike or soundalike (and you don't claim otherwise), there's no problem.

This isn't true. At least with respect to "soundalike" see, e.g., Waits v. Frito-Lay 978 F.2d 1093 and Midler v. Ford Motor Co. 849 F.2d 460.

◧◩◪◨
4. pauldd+mK2[view] [source] 2024-05-23 19:05:23
>>kopecs+tA2
Lol what a joke.

The famous person "owns" the sound of their voice, and the non-famous person does not.

Get wrecked peasants.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. standa+393[view] [source] 2024-05-23 21:31:07
>>pauldd+mK2
Imagine being sued by a celebrity for looking or sounding like them. Should've not chosen to born with a similar voice.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. kamaal+pL3[view] [source] 2024-05-24 03:22:44
>>standa+393
This whole thing is so bizarre.

A lot of people look handsome, sound handsome and are even stylish. So some rich person can randomly claim some one looks closer or sounds closer to them and hence needs to forced to wear a mask to prevented from even talking?

So what happens next, when AI bots begin to sing, compose music, teach, paint or anything for that matter?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. deprec+Ek4[view] [source] 2024-05-24 10:28:09
>>kamaal+pL3
I don't think it's a trivial thing as vanity though it would be a convenient culprit. Instead, I believe what makes more sense is endorsement and one's right to their likeness. If the person had merely sounded similar it probably wouldn't be an issue. Rather it seems to be that in each case the party caught out seems to have intentionally sought to convince people that she endorsed the product and/or may have been financially tied.
[go to top]