zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. JumpCr+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-05-23 07:48:17
> like if they disallowed cars on the roads to protect horse carriages

What? Nobody is banning OpenAI from licensing voices. The censure is on, at the very least, using an unlicensed likeness to promote their new products without compensation. (Assuming Sky truly is a clean-room product.)

Likeness just became a tradeable product. That wasn't true before. The better analogy is in recognising mineral rights, including crude oil, after the utility of it was recognised and traded on [1].

> ultra wealthy celebrities

We have a hundred millionaire atop a multi-billion dollar industry fighting a billionaire atop a multi-billion dollar company. Nobody gets to cry poverty.

> can imagine in a decade some place like China which doesn't care about protecting celebrities

Would positively love to see Altman try to pull this stunt with Xi Jinping's voice.

[1] https://info.courthousedirect.com/blog/history-of-mineral-ri...

replies(3): >>defros+D1 >>contra+22 >>persni+N7
2. defros+D1[view] [source] 2024-05-23 08:01:38
>>JumpCr+(OP)
I'd like to see him go further again,

deliver all discussions on Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era via an animated Pooh Bear with the voice from the movie.

https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/23/china_xi_jinping_chat...

3. contra+22[view] [source] 2024-05-23 08:05:22
>>JumpCr+(OP)
"Likeness just became a tradeable product. That wasn't true before."

Only because the government is making it that way. It's not an inevitability. It's a shortsighted move that doesn't add any value to society. It only serves to make celebrities even more wealthy

replies(1): >>JumpCr+m2
◧◩
4. JumpCr+m2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-23 08:08:10
>>contra+22
> Only because the government is making it that way. It's not an inevitability.

Likeness wasn’t mass producible. It is now. That isn’t because of government but technology.

> doesn't add any value to society

According to whom? Certainly not Johansson or OpenAI.

> only serves to make celebrities even more wealthy

You don’t see how an entry-level actor doesn’t benefit from their first short skit being a substitute for a life’s work?

5. persni+N7[view] [source] 2024-05-23 08:54:25
>>JumpCr+(OP)
What makes a likeness a likeness?

A measure of similarity? Then I demand all people sounding like me to license their voice from me.

A claim that the voice originates from a certain person? Then you don't need any licensing in this case.

replies(1): >>JumpCr+B8
◧◩
6. JumpCr+B8[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-23 09:03:28
>>persni+N7
> What makes a likeness a likeness?

I'm not sure. Precedented personality rights would be a good place to start [1].

I'd argue for a higher standard of evidence for human-produced voices, Middler v. Ford Motor Co. seems good as any [2]. But a lower burden for synthesised voices, given the difficulty in proving intent and mass producibility of them.

> A claim that the voice originates from a certain person? Then you don't need any licensing in this case

Altman basically claimed as much by tweeting about Her in its context. At that point, he is using her fame to market his products without her permission.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

replies(1): >>persni+Nz
◧◩◪
7. persni+Nz[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-05-23 12:41:46
>>JumpCr+B8
Oh, I wasn't aware of the last bit (brokenwall). Now we're entering gray area, depending on what was said exactly, and how much of a contribution voice actors made their characters.
[go to top]