7 ms·

There are hundreds of people with similar voices. If any voice actor can pull the same accent than Ms. Johansson, it should be fair game, as long it was the ori

There are hundreds of people with similar voices. If any voice actor can pull the same accent than Ms. Johansson, it should be fair game, as long it was the original training material? Voices cannot be copyrighted or be exclusive, although I am sure Hollywood will try to copyright them in some point.

tangentstar 2y ago
No, voices can be exclusive. One good example is Bette Midler, who sued Ford in tort for misappropriation of voice and won on appeal to CA9. 849 F.2d 460.
riku_iki 2y ago
With generative AI training may not be needed, it can be part of prompt: imitate voice like in this file: her.mp3.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  If that's not training, then it is, as you say in your suggested prompt... Imitation. You think that's somehow better?
- BobbyJo 2y ago
  that's..... that's training.
  - rockemsockem 2y ago
    It's, not though.
  - px43 2y ago
    It's only training if it remembers it after the conversation is over.
    - Cheer2171 2y ago
      Absolutely false.
afavour 2y ago
He kind of ruined that argument when he tweeted “Her” alongside the video. Pretty clearly drawing a line between the voice and Johansson’s portrayal in the movie. Incredible, really. It would have been so easy to just… not do that.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  That makes it weird, but it doesn't (itself) mean they literally used her voice. It just means they were inspired by the movie. It's not illegal to be weird.
  - lwansbrough 2y ago
    The founding principle of Silicon Valley.
  - throwaway42668 2y ago
    Perpetual benefit of the doubt given for every implication as though it’s happening in a vacuum is how humanity keeps putting megalomaniacs and sociopaths into positions of power and influence. It’s really a shame.
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      If we're going to pillory Sam Altman, it's important to do it for the right reasons. That was not a good reason. I really should not need to defend this principle.
      - jrflowers 2y ago
        What reason do you suggest is more appropriate to “pillory Sam Altman”
        andrewflnr 2y ago
        Most of the other ones in this thread?
dotnet00 2y ago
I think the issue is intent. It's fine if two voices happen to be similar. But it becomes a problem if you're explicitly trying to mimic someone's likeness in a way that is not obviously fair use (eg parody). If they reached out to Johansson first and then explicitly attempted to mimic her despite her refusal, it might be a problem. If the other voice was chosen first, and had nothing to do with sounding the same as Johansson, they should be fine.
- michaelmrose 2y ago
  You don't need fair use for something that isn't copyrightable.
  - bobthepanda 2y ago
    No, it is. Waits v. Frito Lay was a successful lawsuit where Tom Waits sued Frito Lay for using an impression of his voice in a radio commercial. https://casetext.com/case/waits-v-frito-lay-inc https://casetext.com/case/waits-v-frito-lay-inc See also Midler v. Ford Motor Co. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
    - michaelmrose 2y ago
      Correct me if I'm wrong that had nothing to do with copyright and fair use is moot
      - bobthepanda 2y ago
        In California, personality rights have the same protections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Celebrities_Rights_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Celebrities_Rights_...
        CRConrad 2y ago
        > In California, personality rights have the same protections. Makes sense if you read "California" as "Hollywood", which has movie stars where the rest of the world has intellectual property.
__loam 2y ago
It's not that simple. Actors have a right to protect the use of their likeness in commercial projects like ads, and using a "soundalike" is not sufficient to say that isn't what you were trying to do. The relevant case law is Waits vs. Frito Lay. The fact that OpenAI approached her about using her voice twice and that Sam Altman tweeted about a movie she starred in makes her case much stronger than if they had just used a similar voice actor.
robofanatic 2y ago
I believe professional singer's voices will be copyrighted in future if not getting already.
- ozim 2y ago
  Try to sing or play a cover just like original of a song - yt will take it down in no time. the same with white noise videos, they strike copyright infringement easy or at least they were. Did not check but I assume so it still is the case.
- williamcotton 2y ago
  Trademarked more likely.
- bobthepanda 2y ago
  they have been since 1988. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
LeonB 2y ago
In back to the future II, Crispin Glover didn’t sign up to be George McFly so they used facial prosthetics and impersonation to continue the George McFly character. He sued Universal, and reportedly settled for $760,000. Example article on the topic - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/back-future-ii-a-legal-833705/amp/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/bac...
- frankacter 2y ago
  While not defending OpenAI or Altman, the caveat here is that this was a voice actor using their natural voice, not an actor impersonating scarlett johansson. Setting a precedent that if your natural voice sounds similar to a more famous actor precludes you from work would be a terrible precedent to set.
  - hluska 2y ago
    If we assume that Scarlett Johansson is telling the truth, why would they try to resume negotiations with her two days before they launched the model? If they found a good actor whose voice sounds like Scarlett Johansson, that’s a great argument. But if they found a good actor whose voice sounds like Scarlett Johansson because the real Scarlett Johansson said no, that gets more questionable. When they did all that and still promoted the launch by directly referring to a Scarlett Johansson role, it got even more questionable. I’m not pulling out my pitchforks but this is reckless.
    - czl 2y ago
      > why would they try to resume negotiations Could they be trying to avert possible negative public perception even if they believe all they did was 100% legal? If you have ample funds and are willing to pay someone to make X easier for you does your offer to pay them imply that X is against the law? If your voice sounds like someone famous now you are prevented from getting any voice acting work? Because that famous person owns the rights to your voice? Tell me which law says this?
Cheer2171 2y ago
> There are hundreds of people with similar voices. Voice *actors* act. It is in the name. The voice they perform in is not their usual voice. A good voice actor can do dozens of different characters. If you hire a voice actor to impersonate someone else's voice, that is infringement. Bette Midler vs Ford, Tom Waits vs Frito Lay are the two big examples of court cases where a company hired voice actors to impersonate a celebrity for an ad, and lost big in court.
- czl 2y ago
  So when a cartoon show hires a sound alike replacement voice actor so that the switch is hard to tell the former actor has a case against the show? Perhaps instead the show has a case against the former voice actor using that same character voice elsewhere such as in radio advertising to impersonate cartoon characters that are not licenced?
  - gamblor956 2y ago
    Theoretically yes. Which is why they disclaim that right in their work contract for a voice acting gig. Believe it or not, these issues have been around for decades, and have been well settled for nearly as long.
    - czl 2y ago
      So the voice of the AI in the film "Her" who do you think has more rights to it being reused elsewhere in association with AI? The voice actor? The film owners? Why then the current news?
      - asadotzler 2y ago
        Depends on the specifics of the contracts which are almost all unique except for some union and management agreed baselines.
WheatMillington 2y ago
Looking like a celebrity is obviously not an issue. A lookalike being passed off as a celebrity is an issue.
- czl 2y ago
  Was OpenAI was passing off their AI model as Johansson? Obviously not. If anything OpenAI tried to mimic the AI from the film Her and owners of that film may try to seek compensation. I hope that fails but they can try.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    > Was OpenAI was passing off their AI model as Johansson? Altman sure af was trying to invoke a character played by (and widely associated with) Johansson. So... > Obviously not. ...[citation needed]
nomel 2y ago
Here’s a side by side. I’m not hearing the similarity that everyone else is: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cx9t8b/vocal_comparison_rashida_jones_vs_chatgpt_sky/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cx9t8b/vocal_comp... Oops, that sounds like a match with Rashida Jones. Here’s one one of Scarlett J.: https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1cx24sy/vocal_comparison_scarjo_vs_samantha_vs_sky/ https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1cx24sy/vocal_... I have a suspicion that most people with strong opinions on this haven’t actually compared Sky and Scarlett Johansson directly.
- xela79 2y ago
  ^^^this Rashida Jones is indeed a closer match, and might well be the person they went to once Scarlett declined and showed no interest.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
FireBeyond 2y ago
The whole "Her" thing, and the fact that even Johansson's family and friends couldn't tell it apart are somewhat telling. Or Altman could reveal the identity of the voice actress OpenAI did use. I'm sure that will happen, and remove all doubt...
- czl 2y ago
  > even Johansson's family and friends couldn't tell it apart are somewhat telling. You can listen to the voices side by side: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cwy6wz/comment/l4z9726/?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cwy6wz/comment/l4... And here is voice of another actress ( Rashida Jones ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385414AVZcA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385414AVZcA This test is not blind but YOU tell me which you think is similar to the openAI sky voice? And what does that tell you about likely court result for Johansson? And having reached this conclusion yourself would you now think the other actress Rashida Jones is entitled to compensation based on this similarly test? Because there are no other women with similar voices? What might support from friends and family of Rashida Jones be an indication of?
rswerve 2y ago
This is not the case. “ A voice, or other distinctive uncopyrightable features, is deemed as part of someone's identity who is famous for that feature and is thus controllable against unauthorized use. Impersonation of a voice, or similarly distinctive feature, must be granted permission by the original artist for a public impersonation, even for copyrighted materials.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
rasz 2y ago
So you really buy this bluff about using another similar sounding voice actor?
m463 2y ago
I think the law doesn't allow impersonation.

tangentstar 2y ago

No, voices can be exclusive. One good example is Bette Midler, who sued Ford in tort for misappropriation of voice and won on appeal to CA9. 849 F.2d 460.

riku_iki 2y ago

With generative AI training may not be needed, it can be part of prompt: imitate voice like in this file: her.mp3.

CRConrad 2y ago
If that's not training, then it is, as you say in your suggested prompt... Imitation. You think that's somehow better?
BobbyJo 2y ago
that's..... that's training.
- rockemsockem 2y ago
  It's, not though.
- px43 2y ago
  It's only training if it remembers it after the conversation is over.
  - Cheer2171 2y ago
    Absolutely false.

afavour 2y ago

He kind of ruined that argument when he tweeted “Her” alongside the video. Pretty clearly drawing a line between the voice and Johansson’s portrayal in the movie. Incredible, really. It would have been so easy to just… not do that.

andrewflnr 2y ago
That makes it weird, but it doesn't (itself) mean they literally used her voice. It just means they were inspired by the movie. It's not illegal to be weird.
- lwansbrough 2y ago
  The founding principle of Silicon Valley.
- throwaway42668 2y ago
  Perpetual benefit of the doubt given for every implication as though it’s happening in a vacuum is how humanity keeps putting megalomaniacs and sociopaths into positions of power and influence. It’s really a shame.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    If we're going to pillory Sam Altman, it's important to do it for the right reasons. That was not a good reason. I really should not need to defend this principle.
    - jrflowers 2y ago
      What reason do you suggest is more appropriate to “pillory Sam Altman”
      - andrewflnr 2y ago
        Most of the other ones in this thread?

dotnet00 2y ago

I think the issue is intent. It's fine if two voices happen to be similar. But it becomes a problem if you're explicitly trying to mimic someone's likeness in a way that is not obviously fair use (eg parody). If they reached out to Johansson first and then explicitly attempted to mimic her despite her refusal, it might be a problem. If the other voice was chosen first, and had nothing to do with sounding the same as Johansson, they should be fine.

michaelmrose 2y ago
You don't need fair use for something that isn't copyrightable.
- bobthepanda 2y ago
  No, it is. Waits v. Frito Lay was a successful lawsuit where Tom Waits sued Frito Lay for using an impression of his voice in a radio commercial. https://casetext.com/case/waits-v-frito-lay-inc https://casetext.com/case/waits-v-frito-lay-inc See also Midler v. Ford Motor Co. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
  - michaelmrose 2y ago
    Correct me if I'm wrong that had nothing to do with copyright and fair use is moot
    - bobthepanda 2y ago
      In California, personality rights have the same protections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Celebrities_Rights_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Celebrities_Rights_...
      - CRConrad 2y ago
        > In California, personality rights have the same protections. Makes sense if you read "California" as "Hollywood", which has movie stars where the rest of the world has intellectual property.

__loam 2y ago

It's not that simple. Actors have a right to protect the use of their likeness in commercial projects like ads, and using a "soundalike" is not sufficient to say that isn't what you were trying to do. The relevant case law is Waits vs. Frito Lay. The fact that OpenAI approached her about using her voice twice and that Sam Altman tweeted about a movie she starred in makes her case much stronger than if they had just used a similar voice actor.

robofanatic 2y ago

I believe professional singer's voices will be copyrighted in future if not getting already.

ozim 2y ago
Try to sing or play a cover just like original of a song - yt will take it down in no time. the same with white noise videos, they strike copyright infringement easy or at least they were. Did not check but I assume so it still is the case.
williamcotton 2y ago
Trademarked more likely.
bobthepanda 2y ago
they have been since 1988. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

LeonB 2y ago

In back to the future II, Crispin Glover didn’t sign up to be George McFly so they used facial prosthetics and impersonation to continue the George McFly character. He sued Universal, and reportedly settled for $760,000. Example article on the topic - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/back-future-ii-a-legal-833705/amp/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/bac...

frankacter 2y ago
While not defending OpenAI or Altman, the caveat here is that this was a voice actor using their natural voice, not an actor impersonating scarlett johansson. Setting a precedent that if your natural voice sounds similar to a more famous actor precludes you from work would be a terrible precedent to set.
- hluska 2y ago
  If we assume that Scarlett Johansson is telling the truth, why would they try to resume negotiations with her two days before they launched the model? If they found a good actor whose voice sounds like Scarlett Johansson, that’s a great argument. But if they found a good actor whose voice sounds like Scarlett Johansson because the real Scarlett Johansson said no, that gets more questionable. When they did all that and still promoted the launch by directly referring to a Scarlett Johansson role, it got even more questionable. I’m not pulling out my pitchforks but this is reckless.
  - czl 2y ago
    > why would they try to resume negotiations Could they be trying to avert possible negative public perception even if they believe all they did was 100% legal? If you have ample funds and are willing to pay someone to make X easier for you does your offer to pay them imply that X is against the law? If your voice sounds like someone famous now you are prevented from getting any voice acting work? Because that famous person owns the rights to your voice? Tell me which law says this?

Cheer2171 2y ago

> There are hundreds of people with similar voices. Voice *actors* act. It is in the name. The voice they perform in is not their usual voice. A good voice actor can do dozens of different characters. If you hire a voice actor to impersonate someone else's voice, that is infringement. Bette Midler vs Ford, Tom Waits vs Frito Lay are the two big examples of court cases where a company hired voice actors to impersonate a celebrity for an ad, and lost big in court.

czl 2y ago
So when a cartoon show hires a sound alike replacement voice actor so that the switch is hard to tell the former actor has a case against the show? Perhaps instead the show has a case against the former voice actor using that same character voice elsewhere such as in radio advertising to impersonate cartoon characters that are not licenced?
- gamblor956 2y ago
  Theoretically yes. Which is why they disclaim that right in their work contract for a voice acting gig. Believe it or not, these issues have been around for decades, and have been well settled for nearly as long.
  - czl 2y ago
    So the voice of the AI in the film "Her" who do you think has more rights to it being reused elsewhere in association with AI? The voice actor? The film owners? Why then the current news?
    - asadotzler 2y ago
      Depends on the specifics of the contracts which are almost all unique except for some union and management agreed baselines.

WheatMillington 2y ago

Looking like a celebrity is obviously not an issue. A lookalike being passed off as a celebrity is an issue.

czl 2y ago
Was OpenAI was passing off their AI model as Johansson? Obviously not. If anything OpenAI tried to mimic the AI from the film Her and owners of that film may try to seek compensation. I hope that fails but they can try.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  > Was OpenAI was passing off their AI model as Johansson? Altman sure af was trying to invoke a character played by (and widely associated with) Johansson. So... > Obviously not. ...[citation needed]

nomel 2y ago

Here’s a side by side. I’m not hearing the similarity that everyone else is: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cx9t8b/vocal_comparison_rashida_jones_vs_chatgpt_sky/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cx9t8b/vocal_comp... Oops, that sounds like a match with Rashida Jones. Here’s one one of Scarlett J.: https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1cx24sy/vocal_comparison_scarjo_vs_samantha_vs_sky/ https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1cx24sy/vocal_... I have a suspicion that most people with strong opinions on this haven’t actually compared Sky and Scarlett Johansson directly.

xela79 2y ago
^^^this Rashida Jones is indeed a closer match, and might well be the person they went to once Scarlett declined and showed no interest.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

FireBeyond 2y ago

The whole "Her" thing, and the fact that even Johansson's family and friends couldn't tell it apart are somewhat telling. Or Altman could reveal the identity of the voice actress OpenAI did use. I'm sure that will happen, and remove all doubt...

czl 2y ago
> even Johansson's family and friends couldn't tell it apart are somewhat telling. You can listen to the voices side by side: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cwy6wz/comment/l4z9726/?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cwy6wz/comment/l4... And here is voice of another actress ( Rashida Jones ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385414AVZcA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385414AVZcA This test is not blind but YOU tell me which you think is similar to the openAI sky voice? And what does that tell you about likely court result for Johansson? And having reached this conclusion yourself would you now think the other actress Rashida Jones is entitled to compensation based on this similarly test? Because there are no other women with similar voices? What might support from friends and family of Rashida Jones be an indication of?

rswerve 2y ago

This is not the case. “ A voice, or other distinctive uncopyrightable features, is deemed as part of someone's identity who is famous for that feature and is thus controllable against unauthorized use. Impersonation of a voice, or similarly distinctive feature, must be granted permission by the original artist for a public impersonation, even for copyrighted materials.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

rasz 2y ago

So you really buy this bluff about using another similar sounding voice actor?

m463 2y ago

I think the law doesn't allow impersonation.