zlacker

You are getting confused by an implementation detail. They wanted to copy her voice, and they did it. They asked for permission and she said no. So they went ahead and did it anyway.

The voice actor involved is irrelevant.

>>boxed+(OP)
>> The voice actor involved is irrelevant.

Quite the contrary, unless you believe that Scarlett Johanson owns the rights to the voice of anyone who sounds like her?

>>gambit+g5
Midler v Ford

>>lagt_t+r8
So I didn't know about this case, and indeed, it's an interesting one. I think the key difference here is that Ford hired an impersonator to sing Midler's song, so you know....the default assumption is that it's Midler singing. In OpenAI case unless they presented the voice as being the voice of Johanson, then I don't see how hiring someone who merely sounds like her would be an issue. The "her" tweet from Altman is of course problematic in this light, but I guess it will be left up to court to decide.

>>gambit+a9
They also asked her multiple times.

>>gambit+a9
> I think the key difference here is that Ford hired an impersonator to sing Midler's song, so you know....the default assumption is that it's Midler singing

Check out the Tom Waits case.

>>boxed+u9
Sure, but until she made that information public it had no role in OpenAi's advertising of their features. It's like as if Ford hired a Midler's impersonator to sign any other song not originally by her and then she pointed out "well Ford actually wanted to hire me some time ago but I said no". It's like....ok? But you provided no services for them, they didn't use any of your lines, songs or anything else than you produced, the only "crime" here is that they hired someone who sounds like you.