zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. hooloo+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:53:21
Both cases seem to have also borrowed from the artists’ songs too however. That could perhaps make a difference.
replies(1): >>pseuda+84
2. pseuda+84[view] [source] 2024-05-21 00:20:23
>>hooloo+(OP)
Bette Midler and Tom Waits didn't control their songs when they sued the companies.
replies(1): >>hooloo+D6
◧◩
3. hooloo+D6[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-21 00:34:58
>>pseuda+84
But it makes it more likely that the listener will associate the commercial with the artist than just using the voice.
replies(2): >>deprec+ur >>pseuda+4t
◧◩◪
4. deprec+ur[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-21 03:45:40
>>hooloo+D6
True to an extent. I'd argue that celebrity of a certain level would make one's voice recognizable and thus confusion can happen.
◧◩◪
5. pseuda+4t[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-21 04:00:36
>>hooloo+D6
The Midler v. Ford decision said her voice was distinctive. Not the song.

OpenAI didn't just use a voice like Scarlett Johansson's. They used it in an AI system they wanted people to associate with AI from movies and the movie where Johansson played an AI particularly.[1][2]

[1] https://blog.samaltman.com/gpt-4o

[2] https://x.com/sama/status/1790075827666796666

[go to top]