4 ms·

It's already easy to put to rest - They asked her twice - They tweeted many references to Her - She declined - Everyone on Earth heard the voice and though

by realce 2y ago

It's already easy to put to rest - They asked her twice - They tweeted many references to Her - She declined - Everyone on Earth heard the voice and thought it was Her - OAI doesn't give a fuck even tho they could have just picked any other voice that could possibly exist, because they should be able to do anything they please without consideration of humans I thought the amount of "Weirdo defending Musk on Twitter' energy for Elon was amazing, but the amount of reality-denial that the OAI defenders have is quite a different beast. They wanted SJ's identity, she declined, they effectively cloned her against her will instead. That's about as sick as you can get. Future really looks bright!

giraffe_lady 2y ago
I really like the way rusty foster described this in today in tabs, it shows the correct amount of contempt for the exercise itself and derision for how stupid they're expecting people to be to believe it. > The Torment Nexus announces it has retained counsel in OpenAI dispute. > On Sunday OpenAI announced it was removing its new horny robot girlfriend voice, explaining in a blog post that the voice was “not an imitation of Scarlett Johansson” at all (and frankly it’s weird of you even to think that???) but was actually the real human meat voice of a completely different actress who goes to another school, you wouldn’t know her. Also she’s from Canada. > Recapping the imbroglio, Casey Newton wrote that Sam Altman is full of shit [measured, respectful] and Ed Zitron wrote that Sam Altman is full of shit [angry diatribe]. But with the final departure of co-founder and actual technologist Ilya Sutskever, whose last-ditch effort to oust Altman failed last fall, OpenAI is now firmly under the control of Paul Graham / Marc Andreessen style technofascist incompetents, and this kind of clown show will increasingly be the norm. There's about a dozen links in there I don't feel like copying but it's easy to find.
freedomben 2y ago
No it's not put to rest, because if they used a different voice actress for the model then it's a legitimate move. Agreed that it's obvious that (assuming there is another voice actress) they found one as close to Scarlett Johansson as possible. That's a dirt bag move. But ~it's not illegal and~ it's not copying if they used a real, different actress. It's Scarlett Johansson's right to refuse her own voice, but it's not her right to prevent anyone else from agreeing. That voice actress that they used has just as much right to her voice as Scarlett Johansson does to hers. Why should the voice actress not be allowed to work just because she sounds like Johansson? Why shouldn't Johansson be disallowed to work because she sounds like the unnamed voice actress? Edit: It may indeed be illegal. Thank you child comments
- qarl 2y ago
  > No it's not put to rest, because if they used a different voice actress for the model then it's a legitimate move. That is simply untrue. Check out the Midler-Ford case, the Tom Waits case as just two examples. If the intent is to mimic the character, you're in trouble. OpenAI is trying to claim they weren't mimicking Samatha, but you'd have to be a fool to believe that, given the other evidence.
  - freedomben 2y ago
    Very interesting, thank you! Given that I agree it's likely not legal. There is definitely plenty of evidence that they wanted Johansson's voice. I'm quite torn on whether this is how it ought to be though. If the burden of proof is on showing intent, then I think it's a good balance. If it shifts to just "chance of confusion" like many trademark cases have, that seems pretty unfair to average people and stacked in favor of the rich and famous. Refs for others: [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co [2]: 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... [3]: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/22/tech/openai-scarlett-johansson-lawsuit-sam-altman/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/22/tech/openai-scarlett-johansso...
- Natfan 2y ago
  advertising agencies have been slapped on the wrist for using "soundalikes": https://www.expertinstitute.com/resources/case-studies/advertising-agencys-use-sound-alike-infringes-singers-right-publicity https://www.expertinstitute.com/resources/case-studies/adver... https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-anot... https://www.tramatm.com/blog/category/other/sound-alikes-5-high-profile-trademark-disputes-involving-phonetic-similarity https://www.tramatm.com/blog/category/other/sound-alikes-5-h...
  - slowmovintarget 2y ago
    Right, and it was just a slap on the wrist for them. I'm betting OpenAI's bet was that they get the buzz and can take the hit from the lawsuit without breaking a sweat. That is, the expected cost of the marketing stunt factored in the cost of the resulting lawsuits and expected settlement and was signed-off on as acceptable.

by realce 2y ago

giraffe_lady 2y ago

I really like the way rusty foster described this in today in tabs, it shows the correct amount of contempt for the exercise itself and derision for how stupid they're expecting people to be to believe it. > The Torment Nexus announces it has retained counsel in OpenAI dispute. > On Sunday OpenAI announced it was removing its new horny robot girlfriend voice, explaining in a blog post that the voice was “not an imitation of Scarlett Johansson” at all (and frankly it’s weird of you even to think that???) but was actually the real human meat voice of a completely different actress who goes to another school, you wouldn’t know her. Also she’s from Canada. > Recapping the imbroglio, Casey Newton wrote that Sam Altman is full of shit [measured, respectful] and Ed Zitron wrote that Sam Altman is full of shit [angry diatribe]. But with the final departure of co-founder and actual technologist Ilya Sutskever, whose last-ditch effort to oust Altman failed last fall, OpenAI is now firmly under the control of Paul Graham / Marc Andreessen style technofascist incompetents, and this kind of clown show will increasingly be the norm. There's about a dozen links in there I don't feel like copying but it's easy to find.

freedomben 2y ago

No it's not put to rest, because if they used a different voice actress for the model then it's a legitimate move. Agreed that it's obvious that (assuming there is another voice actress) they found one as close to Scarlett Johansson as possible. That's a dirt bag move. But ~it's not illegal and~ it's not copying if they used a real, different actress. It's Scarlett Johansson's right to refuse her own voice, but it's not her right to prevent anyone else from agreeing. That voice actress that they used has just as much right to her voice as Scarlett Johansson does to hers. Why should the voice actress not be allowed to work just because she sounds like Johansson? Why shouldn't Johansson be disallowed to work because she sounds like the unnamed voice actress? Edit: It may indeed be illegal. Thank you child comments

qarl 2y ago
> No it's not put to rest, because if they used a different voice actress for the model then it's a legitimate move. That is simply untrue. Check out the Midler-Ford case, the Tom Waits case as just two examples. If the intent is to mimic the character, you're in trouble. OpenAI is trying to claim they weren't mimicking Samatha, but you'd have to be a fool to believe that, given the other evidence.
- freedomben 2y ago
  Very interesting, thank you! Given that I agree it's likely not legal. There is definitely plenty of evidence that they wanted Johansson's voice. I'm quite torn on whether this is how it ought to be though. If the burden of proof is on showing intent, then I think it's a good balance. If it shifts to just "chance of confusion" like many trademark cases have, that seems pretty unfair to average people and stacked in favor of the rich and famous. Refs for others: [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co [2]: 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... [3]: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/22/tech/openai-scarlett-johansson-lawsuit-sam-altman/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/22/tech/openai-scarlett-johansso...
Natfan 2y ago
advertising agencies have been slapped on the wrist for using "soundalikes": https://www.expertinstitute.com/resources/case-studies/advertising-agencys-use-sound-alike-infringes-singers-right-publicity https://www.expertinstitute.com/resources/case-studies/adver... https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-anot... https://www.tramatm.com/blog/category/other/sound-alikes-5-high-profile-trademark-disputes-involving-phonetic-similarity https://www.tramatm.com/blog/category/other/sound-alikes-5-h...
- slowmovintarget 2y ago
  Right, and it was just a slap on the wrist for them. I'm betting OpenAI's bet was that they get the buzz and can take the hit from the lawsuit without breaking a sweat. That is, the expected cost of the marketing stunt factored in the cost of the resulting lawsuits and expected settlement and was signed-off on as acceptable.