zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. rowanG+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-05-21 22:44:48
Oke and they weren't able to get her and then did a fall back to a different voice actor. How is that problematic? That's like trying to cast a specific actor in a movie, they decline and then you find the next closest match. It's not acceptable that the originally wanted actor then throws a hissy fit. I don't see the reason for outrage here at all.
replies(2): >>verdve+f1 >>comput+z1
2. verdve+f1[view] [source] 2024-05-21 22:50:51
>>rowanG+(OP)
The confusion (and that OAI attempted to recruit her) is sufficient grounds for a lawsuit to the effect that they impersonated her. Generally, celebrities have ownership and rights over their likeness for commercial or promotional purposes.

OpenAI tried to benefit by using "her" likeness without permission or a contract/license

replies(1): >>rowanG+f2
3. comput+z1[view] [source] 2024-05-21 22:52:01
>>rowanG+(OP)
I don't know, but Sam seemed to think it necessary to try to get her permission first, so it must be at least somewhat problematic.

Yeah, "the major AI product in the world" to ask to use a famous actors voice, and then when she says no, create something similar anyways, is at least a little be slimy and really a bad idea on many different levels (legally for one thing).

replies(1): >>Walter+Ga
◧◩
4. rowanG+f2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-21 22:55:29
>>verdve+f1
So If a director tries to cast Scarlett Johansson and she denies. Then instead casts Amber Heard in the movie. He is opening himself to lawsuits? Because Amber Heard looks very similar to Scarlet Johansson? I can't believe that. What gives Scarlett Johansson the right to block Amber Heard from playing in a movie she was considered for?

I think this is what this argument comes down to but just in terms of voices.

replies(1): >>verdve+o8
◧◩◪
5. verdve+o8[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-21 23:26:45
>>rowanG+f2
This is different and there is existing case law, see this other comment on this post

>>40435274

◧◩
6. Walter+Ga[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-21 23:42:05
>>comput+z1
> Sam seemed to think it necessary to try to get her permission first

Weird Al also gets permission to do a parody even though it is not legally required.

replies(1): >>comput+fj
◧◩◪
7. comput+fj[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-22 00:52:18
>>Walter+Ga
Well, Weird Al is singing funny songs to a niche group of people, while Sam Altman is creating cutting-edge AI known and used throughout the world. Very different audiences.

Yeah, big business needs to be held to higher standard since they have so much power and affect so many people (and this higher standard is especially important since AI is uncharted territory and also since OpenAI already had a failed coup)

[go to top]