5 ms·

I thought it sounded like Jodie Foster.

ncr100 2y ago
Scar Jo thought it sounded like herself, and so did people who knew her personally. That is what matters. OWNERSHIP over her contributions to the world.
- mcphage 2y ago
  Clearly Sam Altman though it sounded like ScarJo as well :-(
- smt88 2y ago
  I mostly agree with you, but I actually don't think it matters if it sounded exactly like her or not. The crime is in the training: did they use her voice or not? If someone licenses an impersonator's voice and it gets very close to the real thing, that feels like an impossible situation for a court to settle and it should probably just be legal (if repugnant).
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
  - sangnoir 2y ago
    > The crime is in the training: did they use her voice or not? This is a civil issue, and actors get broad rights to their likeliness. Kim Kardashian sued Old Navy for using a look-alike actress in an ad; old Navy chose to settle, which makes it appear like "the real actress wasn't involved in any way" may not be a perfect defense. The timeline makes it clear they wanted it to sound like Scarlett's voice, the actual mechanics on how they got the AI to sound like that is only part of the story.
  - randoglando 2y ago
    > If someone licenses an impersonator's voice and it gets very close to the real thing, that feels like an impossible situation for a court to settle and it should probably just be legal (if repugnant). Does that mean if cosplayers dress up like some other character, they can use that version of the character in their games/media? I think it should be equally simple to settle. It's different if it's their natural voice. Even then, it brings into question whether they can use "doppelgangers" legally.
  - aseipp 2y ago
    It is not an impossible situation, courts have settled it, and what you describe is not how the law works (despite how many computer engineers think to the contrary.)
    - smt88 2y ago
      Courts have settled almost nothing related to AI. We don't even know if training AI using copyrighted works is a violating of copyright law. Please point to a case where someone was successfully sued for sounding too much like a celebrity (while not using the celebrity's name or claiming to be them).
      - davidgerard 2y ago
        Multiple cases already answering your question in this thread.
      - ascorbic 2y ago
        Midler vs Ford: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
  - dv_dt 2y ago
    As I understand it (though I may be wrong) in music sampling cases, it doesn’t matter if the “sample” is using an actual clip from a recording or if were recreated from scratch using a new media (e.g. direct midi sequence), if a song sampling another song is recognizable it is still infringing.
    - parineum 2y ago
      Sampling is not the same as duplication. Sampling is allowed as it's a derivitive work as long as it's substantially different from the original. It's a "I know it when I see it" situation so it's not clear cut.
      - Findecanor 2y ago
        Oh, the day when an artist could sample other artists without attribution and royalties is long gone. The music labels are very hard on this these days.
  - XorNot 2y ago
    If OpenAI commissioned a voice actor to lend their voice to the Sky model, and cast on the basis of trying to get someone who is similar sounding to the Scarlett Johannson, but then did not advertise or otherwise use the voice model created to claim it was Scarlett Johannson - then they're completely in the clear. Because then the actual case would be fairly bizarre: an entirely separate person, selling the rights to their own likeness as they are entitled to do, is being prohibited from doing that by the courts because they sound too much like an already famous person. EDIT: Also up front I'm not sure you can entirely discuss timelines for changing out technology here. We have voice cloning systems that can do it with as little as 15 seconds of audio. So having a demo reel of what they wanted to do that they could've used on a few days notice isn't unrealistic - and training a model and not using it or releasing it also isn't illegal.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - cycomanic 2y ago
      That's confidently incorrect. Many others already posted that this has been settled case law for many years. I mean would you argue that if someone build a macbook lookalike, but not using the same components would be completely clear?
      - XorNot 2y ago
        I ask you what do you call the Framework [1]? Or Dell's offerings?[2] Compared to the Macbook? [3] Look kind of similar right? Lot of familiar styling queues? What would take it from "similar" to actual infringement? Well if you slapped an Apple Logo on there, that would do it. Did OpenAI make an actual claim? Did they actually use Scarlett Johannson's public image and voice as sampling for the system? [1] https://images.prismic.io/frameworkmarketplace/25c9a15f-4374-4144-863e-1c649ea24dd8_iris-azalea-sidebyside-01.jpg?auto=compress,format https://images.prismic.io/frameworkmarketplace/25c9a15f-4374... [2] https://i.dell.com/is/image/DellContent/content/dam/ss2/product-images/dell-client-products/notebooks/inspiron-notebooks/15-3520/media-gallery/in3520-xnb-01-sl.psd?fmt=png-alpha&pscan=auto&scl=1&hei=402&wid=402&qlt=100,1&resMode=sharp2&size=402,402&chrss=full https://i.dell.com/is/image/DellContent/content/dam/ss2/prod... [3] https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/IMG_1134-800x533.jpeg https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/IMG_1...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - jonathankoren 2y ago
    This has been settled law for 34 years. See Tom Waits v Frito-Lay. They literally hired an impersonator, and it cost them 2.5 million (~6 million today). https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-09-me-238-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-09-me-238-st...
    - smt88 2y ago
      That case seems completely dissimilar to what OpenAI did. Frito-Lay copied a song by Waits (with different lyrics) and had an impersonator sing it. Witnesses testified they thought Waits had sung the song. If OpenAI were to anonymously copy someone's voice by training AI on an imitation, you wouldn't have: - a recognizable singing voice - music identified with a singer - market confusion about whose voice it is (since it's novel audio coming from a machine) I don't think any of this is ethical and think voice-cloning should be entirely illegal, but I also don't think we have good precedents for most AI issues.
      - jonathankoren 2y ago
        Let me connect the dots for you. Company identifies celebrity voice they want. (Frito=Waits, OpenAi=ScarJo) Company comes up with novel thing for the the voice to say. (Frito=Song, OpenAI=ChatGpt) Company decides they don’t need the celebrity they want (Frito=Waits, OpenAI=ScarJo) and instead hire an impersonator (Frito=singer, {OpenAI=impersonator or OpenAI=ScarJo-public-recordings}) to get what they want (Frito=a-facsimile-of-Tom-Waitte’s-voice-in-a-commercial, OpenAi=a-fascimilie-of-ScarJo’s-voice-in-their-chatbot) When made public, people confuse the fascimilie as the real thing. I don’t see how you don’t see a parallel. It’s literally best for beat the same, particularly around the part about using an impersonator as an excuse.
- minimaxir 2y ago
  More notably for legal purposes, there were several independent news reports corroborating the vocal similarity.
  - sangnoir 2y ago
    ...and sama's tweet referencing "Her"
- dyno12345 2y ago
  I'm not sure how much you currently legally own imitations of your own voice. There's a whole market for voice actors who can imitate particular famous voices.
  - adolph 2y ago
    Should have renamed it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi Or https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9n44b6/til_that_when_astronomer_carl_sagan_sent_apple_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9n44b6/til_t...
  - stonogo 2y ago
    When those imitations are commercialized, there is a disclaimer that a celebrity voice is being impersonated, and parody is a legally protected form of speech. OpenAI is not parodying anything, and failed even the low bar of having a disclaimer.
- parineum 2y ago
  She doesn't own most (all probably) of her contributions to the world. If the voice was only trained on the voice of the character she played in Her, would she have any standing in claiming some kind of infringement?
  - lesostep 2y ago
    IANAL, but – I think it's most likely to be an infringement on her right of publicity (i.e. the right to control the commercial value of your name, likeness, etc.) She doesn't have to own anything to claim this right, if the value of her voice is recognizable.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

Scar Jo thought it sounded like herself, and so did people who knew her personally. That is what matters. OWNERSHIP over her contributions to the world.

mcphage 2y ago
Clearly Sam Altman though it sounded like ScarJo as well :-(
smt88 2y ago
I mostly agree with you, but I actually don't think it matters if it sounded exactly like her or not. The crime is in the training: did they use her voice or not? If someone licenses an impersonator's voice and it gets very close to the real thing, that feels like an impossible situation for a court to settle and it should probably just be legal (if repugnant).
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
- sangnoir 2y ago
  > The crime is in the training: did they use her voice or not? This is a civil issue, and actors get broad rights to their likeliness. Kim Kardashian sued Old Navy for using a look-alike actress in an ad; old Navy chose to settle, which makes it appear like "the real actress wasn't involved in any way" may not be a perfect defense. The timeline makes it clear they wanted it to sound like Scarlett's voice, the actual mechanics on how they got the AI to sound like that is only part of the story.
- randoglando 2y ago
  > If someone licenses an impersonator's voice and it gets very close to the real thing, that feels like an impossible situation for a court to settle and it should probably just be legal (if repugnant). Does that mean if cosplayers dress up like some other character, they can use that version of the character in their games/media? I think it should be equally simple to settle. It's different if it's their natural voice. Even then, it brings into question whether they can use "doppelgangers" legally.
- aseipp 2y ago
  It is not an impossible situation, courts have settled it, and what you describe is not how the law works (despite how many computer engineers think to the contrary.)
  - smt88 2y ago
    Courts have settled almost nothing related to AI. We don't even know if training AI using copyrighted works is a violating of copyright law. Please point to a case where someone was successfully sued for sounding too much like a celebrity (while not using the celebrity's name or claiming to be them).
    - davidgerard 2y ago
      Multiple cases already answering your question in this thread.
    - ascorbic 2y ago
      Midler vs Ford: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
- dv_dt 2y ago
  As I understand it (though I may be wrong) in music sampling cases, it doesn’t matter if the “sample” is using an actual clip from a recording or if were recreated from scratch using a new media (e.g. direct midi sequence), if a song sampling another song is recognizable it is still infringing.
  - parineum 2y ago
    Sampling is not the same as duplication. Sampling is allowed as it's a derivitive work as long as it's substantially different from the original. It's a "I know it when I see it" situation so it's not clear cut.
    - Findecanor 2y ago
      Oh, the day when an artist could sample other artists without attribution and royalties is long gone. The music labels are very hard on this these days.
- XorNot 2y ago
  If OpenAI commissioned a voice actor to lend their voice to the Sky model, and cast on the basis of trying to get someone who is similar sounding to the Scarlett Johannson, but then did not advertise or otherwise use the voice model created to claim it was Scarlett Johannson - then they're completely in the clear. Because then the actual case would be fairly bizarre: an entirely separate person, selling the rights to their own likeness as they are entitled to do, is being prohibited from doing that by the courts because they sound too much like an already famous person. EDIT: Also up front I'm not sure you can entirely discuss timelines for changing out technology here. We have voice cloning systems that can do it with as little as 15 seconds of audio. So having a demo reel of what they wanted to do that they could've used on a few days notice isn't unrealistic - and training a model and not using it or releasing it also isn't illegal.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - cycomanic 2y ago
    That's confidently incorrect. Many others already posted that this has been settled case law for many years. I mean would you argue that if someone build a macbook lookalike, but not using the same components would be completely clear?
    - XorNot 2y ago
      I ask you what do you call the Framework [1]? Or Dell's offerings?[2] Compared to the Macbook? [3] Look kind of similar right? Lot of familiar styling queues? What would take it from "similar" to actual infringement? Well if you slapped an Apple Logo on there, that would do it. Did OpenAI make an actual claim? Did they actually use Scarlett Johannson's public image and voice as sampling for the system? [1] https://images.prismic.io/frameworkmarketplace/25c9a15f-4374-4144-863e-1c649ea24dd8_iris-azalea-sidebyside-01.jpg?auto=compress,format https://images.prismic.io/frameworkmarketplace/25c9a15f-4374... [2] https://i.dell.com/is/image/DellContent/content/dam/ss2/product-images/dell-client-products/notebooks/inspiron-notebooks/15-3520/media-gallery/in3520-xnb-01-sl.psd?fmt=png-alpha&pscan=auto&scl=1&hei=402&wid=402&qlt=100,1&resMode=sharp2&size=402,402&chrss=full https://i.dell.com/is/image/DellContent/content/dam/ss2/prod... [3] https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/IMG_1134-800x533.jpeg https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/IMG_1...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- jonathankoren 2y ago
  This has been settled law for 34 years. See Tom Waits v Frito-Lay. They literally hired an impersonator, and it cost them 2.5 million (~6 million today). https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-09-me-238-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-09-me-238-st...
  - smt88 2y ago
    That case seems completely dissimilar to what OpenAI did. Frito-Lay copied a song by Waits (with different lyrics) and had an impersonator sing it. Witnesses testified they thought Waits had sung the song. If OpenAI were to anonymously copy someone's voice by training AI on an imitation, you wouldn't have: - a recognizable singing voice - music identified with a singer - market confusion about whose voice it is (since it's novel audio coming from a machine) I don't think any of this is ethical and think voice-cloning should be entirely illegal, but I also don't think we have good precedents for most AI issues.
    - jonathankoren 2y ago
      Let me connect the dots for you. Company identifies celebrity voice they want. (Frito=Waits, OpenAi=ScarJo) Company comes up with novel thing for the the voice to say. (Frito=Song, OpenAI=ChatGpt) Company decides they don’t need the celebrity they want (Frito=Waits, OpenAI=ScarJo) and instead hire an impersonator (Frito=singer, {OpenAI=impersonator or OpenAI=ScarJo-public-recordings}) to get what they want (Frito=a-facsimile-of-Tom-Waitte’s-voice-in-a-commercial, OpenAi=a-fascimilie-of-ScarJo’s-voice-in-their-chatbot) When made public, people confuse the fascimilie as the real thing. I don’t see how you don’t see a parallel. It’s literally best for beat the same, particularly around the part about using an impersonator as an excuse.
minimaxir 2y ago
More notably for legal purposes, there were several independent news reports corroborating the vocal similarity.
- sangnoir 2y ago
  ...and sama's tweet referencing "Her"
dyno12345 2y ago
I'm not sure how much you currently legally own imitations of your own voice. There's a whole market for voice actors who can imitate particular famous voices.
- adolph 2y ago
  Should have renamed it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosumi Or https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9n44b6/til_that_when_astronomer_carl_sagan_sent_apple_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9n44b6/til_t...
- stonogo 2y ago
  When those imitations are commercialized, there is a disclaimer that a celebrity voice is being impersonated, and parody is a legally protected form of speech. OpenAI is not parodying anything, and failed even the low bar of having a disclaimer.
parineum 2y ago
She doesn't own most (all probably) of her contributions to the world. If the voice was only trained on the voice of the character she played in Her, would she have any standing in claiming some kind of infringement?
- lesostep 2y ago
  IANAL, but – I think it's most likely to be an infringement on her right of publicity (i.e. the right to control the commercial value of your name, likeness, etc.) She doesn't have to own anything to claim this right, if the value of her voice is recognizable.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]