3 ms·

The answer, based on two different court precedents (Bette Midler, Tom Waits), is that the company can't do that. Companies cannot hire soundalike people to adv

by not2b 2y ago

The answer, based on two different court precedents (Bette Midler, Tom Waits), is that the company can't do that. Companies cannot hire soundalike people to advertise their products after the person with a distinctive voice they really wanted declined. Doesn't matter if they hired a soundalike and used her voice.

crimsoneer 2y ago
There is a big, big difference between actively and intentional imitating a voice, and having a broadly similar voice though!
- crimsoneer 2y ago
  The CEO tweeting a jokey reference to your voice really doesn't help though.
- talldayo 2y ago
  A difference that gets increasingly narrow when you are desperately trying to license the original likeness.
- bigiain 2y ago
  Yeah but... Them trying (and failing) to negotiate the rights, and then them vaguely attempting again 2 days before launch, and fucking Altman tweeting a quite obvious reference to a movie in which SJ is the voice of an AI girlfriend - leans very very strongly in the direction of "active and intentional imitation". Anybody trying to claim some accidental or coincidental similarity here has a pretty serious credibility hole they need to start digging themselves out of.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
chipweinberger 2y ago
If they are not trying to trick people into believing xyz person did the voice acting, and instead are going for a certain style, I think they would be protected by freedom of expression. Think of how authors of books describe voices in great detail. i.e. intent matters. In this case, since the other voice actor has a clearly different voice than SJ, it seems like their intent is to just copy the general 'style' of the voice, and not SJ's voice itself. Speculative though.
- Ar-Curunir 2y ago
  > In this case, since the other voice actor has a clearly different voice than SJ, it seems like their intent is to just copy the general 'style' of the voice, and not SJ's voice itself. How can you say that when they literally approached SJ for her voice, and then asked the voice actor to reproduce SJ's voice?!
  - chipweinberger 2y ago
    > and then asked the voice actor to reproduce SJ's voice?! you are just making that up afaict. > How can you say that when they literally approached SJ for her voice Almost by definition SJ's voice will match the style of 'Her', at least for awhile (*). So why not ask SJ first? (*) voices change significantly over time.
  - rvz 2y ago
    Exactly this. The fact Johansson did not give permission to OpenAI to use their voice, they then hired a voice actor to similarly copy her voice likeliness with Altman tweeting a reference to the film ‘Her’ which Johansson was the starring voice actor in that film, tells you that OpenAI intended to clone and use her voice even without permission. OpenAI HAD to pull the voice down to not risk yet another lawsuit. The parent comment clearly has the weakest defense I have seen on this discussion.

by not2b 2y ago

crimsoneer 2y ago

There is a big, big difference between actively and intentional imitating a voice, and having a broadly similar voice though!

crimsoneer 2y ago
The CEO tweeting a jokey reference to your voice really doesn't help though.
talldayo 2y ago
A difference that gets increasingly narrow when you are desperately trying to license the original likeness.
bigiain 2y ago
Yeah but... Them trying (and failing) to negotiate the rights, and then them vaguely attempting again 2 days before launch, and fucking Altman tweeting a quite obvious reference to a movie in which SJ is the voice of an AI girlfriend - leans very very strongly in the direction of "active and intentional imitation". Anybody trying to claim some accidental or coincidental similarity here has a pretty serious credibility hole they need to start digging themselves out of.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

chipweinberger 2y ago

If they are not trying to trick people into believing xyz person did the voice acting, and instead are going for a certain style, I think they would be protected by freedom of expression. Think of how authors of books describe voices in great detail. i.e. intent matters. In this case, since the other voice actor has a clearly different voice than SJ, it seems like their intent is to just copy the general 'style' of the voice, and not SJ's voice itself. Speculative though.

Ar-Curunir 2y ago
> In this case, since the other voice actor has a clearly different voice than SJ, it seems like their intent is to just copy the general 'style' of the voice, and not SJ's voice itself. How can you say that when they literally approached SJ for her voice, and then asked the voice actor to reproduce SJ's voice?!
- chipweinberger 2y ago
  > and then asked the voice actor to reproduce SJ's voice?! you are just making that up afaict. > How can you say that when they literally approached SJ for her voice Almost by definition SJ's voice will match the style of 'Her', at least for awhile (*). So why not ask SJ first? (*) voices change significantly over time.
- rvz 2y ago
  Exactly this. The fact Johansson did not give permission to OpenAI to use their voice, they then hired a voice actor to similarly copy her voice likeliness with Altman tweeting a reference to the film ‘Her’ which Johansson was the starring voice actor in that film, tells you that OpenAI intended to clone and use her voice even without permission. OpenAI HAD to pull the voice down to not risk yet another lawsuit. The parent comment clearly has the weakest defense I have seen on this discussion.