zlacker

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+(OP)
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+A2
There is a big, big difference between actively and intentional imitating a voice, and having a broadly similar voice though!

>>crimso+N3
The CEO tweeting a jokey reference to your voice really doesn't help though.

>>crimso+N3
A difference that gets increasingly narrow when you are desperately trying to license the original likeness.

>>crimso+N3
Yeah but...

Them trying (and failing) to negotiate the rights, and then them vaguely attempting again 2 days before launch, and fucking Altman tweeting a quite obvious reference to a movie in which SJ is the voice of an AI girlfriend - leans very very strongly in the direction of "active and intentional imitation".

Anybody trying to claim some accidental or coincidental similarity here has a pretty serious credibility hole they need to start digging themselves out of.

>>ThinkB+(OP)
SJ's side would use pre-action discovery and trawl through internal OpenAI communications to check. If there was any suggestion of instruction from management to find a similar voice, they'd potentially be in trouble. There's already the indication that they wanted her voice through official channels.

And would they need to use a voice actor when there is a substantial body of movie dialogue and interviews? I'd be surprised if they'd bothered.

>>not2b+A2
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+4l
> 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+Cl
> 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.

>>Ar-Cur+Cl
Exactly this.

The fact Johansson did not give permission to OpenAI to use their voice, they then hired a voice actor to similarly copy her voice likeliness with Altman tweeting a reference to the film ‘Her’ which Johansson was the starring voice actor in that film, tells you that OpenAI intended to clone and use her voice even without permission.

OpenAI HAD to pull the voice down to not risk yet another lawsuit.

The parent comment clearly has the weakest defense I have seen on this discussion.

>>prawn+Ph
This happens a lot in movies though. If the lead famous actor turns down a part, esp in a sequel the film maker will spend time deliberately finding an actor that looks a lot like the lead star.

(or they rewrite the roll)