zlacker

no, that's definitely not illegal. Voices are not trademarkable, only jingles (melody, words + tone), and of course specific recordings of voices are copyrighted. The ONLY way they get in trouble is if they claim to be Morgan Freeman.

>>throwa+(OP)
"Trademark" is not the correct way to talk about it, but commercial use of an impersonation can be a breach of the right of publicity, even if they don't actually say they're the person.

>>throwa+(OP)
A reasonable person would assume that the voice in the commercial is Morgan Freeman, which could be very problematic for the commercial maker.

>>throwa+(OP)
Voices may not be trademarkable but I'm pretty sure styles and intonations are.

>>throwa+(OP)
> Voices are not trademarkable

But they are subject to right of publicity in many US jurisdictions.

Which, while more like trademark than copyright (the other thing that keeps getting raised as if it should dispose of this issue), is its own area of law, distinct from either trademark or copyright.

> The ONLY way they get in trouble is if they claim to be Morgan Freeman.

That’s…not true. Though such an explicit claim would definitely be a way that they could get in trouble.

>>thehap+x4
How do commerical Elvis impersonators (or commercial Elvis impersonators in commercials) get away with it?

>>dragon+fO
> In the United States, no federal statute or case law recognizes the right of publicity, although federal unfair competition law recognizes a related statutory right to protection against false endorsement, association, or affiliation

https://www.inta.org/topics/right-of-publicity/#:~:text=In%2....

>>throwa+td1
Because no reasonable person thinks it’s actually Elvis.

>>throwa+Ld1
The important word in that quote is “federal”. In the US, right of publicity is a state law right in many states (often of particular note because of the concentration of tech and entertainment industries, it is a state law right in California.)