3 ms·
Courts and lawyers will do a bad job, and also the best job out of every option available. As it has been for 100 years.
by Lord-Jobo 3y ago
Courts and lawyers will do a bad job, and also the best job out of every option available. As it has been for 100 years.
- argiopetech 3y agoI'm sure the Brits would claim since 1066.
- spacebanana7 3y agoVoice cloning seems much harder to regulate with copyright than most other issues because 1) there's a continuous spectrum of vocal similarity 2) the tools of voice cloning are available to hundreds of millions of people 3) there may be several real individuals who could claim a voice similar to David Attenborough was also similar to theirs. Using trademarks seems like a more realistic means of regulation. Allowing David Attenborough to sue anyone that falsely and publicly credits him as a narrator seems feasible within existing law, and extending this to cover anti-avoidance tactics like "narrated in the style of David Attenborough" wouldn't be that much of an overreach.
- themaninthedark 3y agoDidn't courts already rule that AI art is not infringing on the original works that it was trained on. I doubt that people are gonna be satisfied with the same voices, instead you will end up with David Attenborough mixed with Morgan Freeman and Patrick Steward. I can't wait to hear the new compelling ads using this technology and I anticipate the scandal when people realize that one of the very charismatic voices belongs to an Austrian who was born in 1933 because I guarantee that his voice will end up in the training data. Here is an idea for someone who like playing with this stuff, personalized entertainment. Pop songs sung by a voice that is a mix of Shakira, Brittany Spears and Lady Gaga, written by Chat GPT-4.