zlacker

That is what discovery is for. If this would ever get to that phase.

Someone from OpenAi hired the agency who hired the voice talent (or talents) for the voice data. They sent them a brief explaining what they are looking for, followed by a metric ton of correspondence over samples and contracts and such.

If anywhere during those written communications anyone wrote “we are looking for a ScarlettJ imitator”, or words to that effect, that is not good for OpenAI. Similarly if they were selecting between options and someone wrote that one sample is more Johansson than an other. Or if anyone at any point asked if they should clear the rights to the voice with Johansson.

Those are the discovery findings which can sink such a defense.

>>krisof+(OP)
I recall the basics from my contracts law class that it’s not against the law to hire an impersonator as long as you don’t claim it’s the celebrity.

So it’s legal to hire someone who sounds like SJ. And likely legal to create a model that sounds like her. But there will likely need to be some disclaimer saying it’s not her voice.

I expect that OpenAI’s defense will be something like “We wanted SJ. She said no, so we made a voice that sounded like her but wasn’t her.” It will be interesting to see what happens.

>>prepen+G1
Bette Midler and Tom Waits won cases where the companies didn't claim the impersonators were them.

>>krisof+(OP)
Discovery works both ways. The original Her voice actress[1] was recast to someone more SoCal in post-production, so there is evidence of the flirty erotic AI style itself not being a unique enough selling point.

It will come down to what makes the complaining celebrity's voice iconic, which for Scarjo is the 'gravelly' bit. Which smooth Sky had none of.

[1] actress reading poem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWEEAjRFJKc

>>unrave+Um
> Discovery works both ways.

Ok? What materials would you suspect discovery can uncover from Scarlett or her team?

> was recast to someone more SoCal in post-production

Was recast to Scarlett Johansson. Hardly a good argument if you want to argue that her voice is not unique.

>>krisof+EZ
I argued Scarlett Johansson's natural voice is iconic and unique and it is not apparent in the Sky voice. The "new" intoned voice of Sky 4o is receiving most claims of likeness ripoff but this intoning part is not unique to ScarJo either since the Her production already had a version of it with the other VA. I doubt scarlett will suggest she was playing herself without creative direction from Her team.

Are you arguing that Her performance is not the resembling factor here but simply the natural voice of ScarJo at rest, disregarding Her?

>>prepen+G1
Odd. This wouldn't typically be covered in contracts class since it's an intellectual property issue beyond the scope of a contracts class. Scarlet Johansen didn't have a contract with OpenAI after all.

What you recall also doesn't sound correct given right of publicity laws.

>>static+rS1
Tell it to my professor :) I guess I was lucky. And perhaps I was taught incorrectly or remember incorrectly.

But I experience lots of ads with impersonators so maybe they just aren’t sued enough.

Also, Jack Nicholson never stopped Christian Slater from acting, so there must be some room for impersonation.