4 ms·
They are free to make money during the term of the copyright, but that term should be reduced by a lot. And I don't think the definition of copyright should be
by dave_sullivan 6y ago
They are free to make money during the term of the copyright, but that term should be reduced by a lot. And I don't think the definition of copyright should be extended to include someone's voice, style, appearance, recipes, or others that I'm leaving out.
- onethought 6y agoIs it an extension? (I know technically it is). Voice could be captured as accent/pitch/tone... I guess it’s a problem as there would be too much natural overlap, so not really a novel expression.
- TeMPOraL 6y agoMaybe voice would be better suited to trademark protection? After all, it isn't really about accent/pitch/tone, but about being sure that if something sounds like it's voiced by $VoiceActor, it's actually voiced by $VoiceActor (and $VoiceActor gets their cut of royalties/recognition).