7 ms·

My guess: Sam wanted to imitate the voice from Her and became aware of Midler v. Ford cases so reached out to SJ. He probably didn't expect her decline. Anyway,

My guess: Sam wanted to imitate the voice from Her and became aware of Midler v. Ford cases so reached out to SJ. He probably didn't expect her decline. Anyway, this prior case tells that you cannot mimic other's voice without their permission and the overall timeline indicates OpenAI's "intention" of imitation. It does not matter if they used SJ's voice in the training set or not. Their intention matters.

Alupis 2y ago
I cannot read the article because of it's paywall - is there actual proof OpenAI reached out to Johansson - or is it just being alleged by her lawyers? It seems she has every reason to benefit from claiming Sky sounded like her even if it was a coincidence. "Go away" payments are very common, even for celebrities - and OpenAI has deep pockets... Even so, if they got a voice actor to impersonate or sound similar to Johansson, is that something that's not allowed?
- srockets 2y ago
  If her lawyers are half competent, then they wouldn’t lie. They may not tell the whole truth, but we’re not discussing what wasn’t said here. As for your second question, yes. Otherwise you have a perfect workaround that would mean a person likeness is free-for-all to use, but we already decided that is not acceptable.
  - Alupis 2y ago
    > Otherwise you have a perfect workaround that would mean a person likeness is free-for-all to use, but we already decided that is not acceptable That is not decided. There have been high profile cases were someone's likeness was explicitly used without permission, and they still had no recourse. It was argued the person was notable enough they could not protect their likeness. Regardless, it appears debated if Sky even sounded like Johansson, which will make this very difficult for anyone to argue (being subjective and all). If the Sky voice actor was recorded prior to engaging with Johansson (which has been claimed by OpenAI), then it seems even more difficult to argue. In the end, this will net Johansson a nice "go away" payday and then everyone will forget about it.
- mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
  >Even so, if they got a voice actor to impersonate or sound similar to Johansson, is that something that's not allowed? Correct, that is not allowed in the US.
- HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
  Johansson is a super successful actress and no doubt rejects 95% of roles offered to her, just as she rejected Altman's request to be the voice of ChatGPT. She doesn't need "go away" payments, and in any case that is not what we're looking at here. OpenAI offered her money to take the part, and she said no. According to celebrity net worth website, SJ is worth $165M.
  - Alupis 2y ago
    > Johansson is a super successful actress and no doubt rejects 95% of roles offered to her > She doesn't need "go away" payments > According to celebrity net worth website, SJ is worth $165M. I have no idea what Johansson's estimated net worth, or her acting career have to do with this? Wealthy people sue all the time for all kinds of ridiculous things. The voice is, in fact, not Johansson. Yet, it appears she will be suing them non-the-less... It's not illegal to sound like someone else - despite what people might be claiming. If it turns out to be true that Sky's voice actor was recorded prior to the attempted engagement with Johansson, then all of this is extra absurd. Also, Sky doesn't sound like Johansson anyway... but apparently that isn't going to matter in this situation.
    - NBJack 2y ago
      Miller v. Ford Motor Co. would disagree. There is a viable legal precedent, and it is very arguably illegal. > The appellate court ruled that the voice of someone famous as a singer is distinctive to their person and image and therefore, as a part of their identity, it is unlawful to imitate their voice without express consent and approval. The appellate court reversed the district court's decision and ruled in favor of Midler, indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
      - throwthrowuknow 2y ago
        They’d have to prove the voice actor was imitating SJ. If OpenAI recorded the entire interview process as well as the sessions where they recorded the actor for samples to steer the model with then it should be open and shut. There’s also the fact of the 4 other voices. Who are they meant to be?
kstrauser 2y ago
Please don't take this as me defending OpenAI's clearly sketchy process. I'm writing this to help myself think through it. If it weren't for their attempt to link the voice to SJ (i.e. with the "her" tweet), would that be OK? - It's fine to hire a voice actor. - It's fine to train a system to sound like that voice actor. - It's fine to hire a voice actor who sounds like someone else. - It's probably fine to go out of your way to hire a voice actor who sounds like someone else. - It's probably not fine to hire a voice actor and tell them to imitate someone else. - It's very likely not fine to market your AI as "sounds like Jane Doe, who sounds like SJ". - It's definitely not fine to market your AI as "sounds like SJ". Say I wanted to make my AI voice sound like Patrick Stewart. Surely it's OK to hire an English actor who sounds a lot like him, so long as I don't use Sir Patrick's name in the advertising. If so, would it have been OK for OpenAI to do all this as long as they didn't mention SJ? Or is SJ so clearly identifiable with her role in "Her" that it's never OK to try to make a product like "Her" that sounds like SJ?
- kevingadd 2y ago
  When it comes to whether something is "wrong", in general intent matters a lot and what they did was communicate an obvious intent. There are certainly ways they could have avoided doing so, and I'm not sure I understand the value of trying to dissect it into a dozen tiny pieces and debate which particular detail pushes it over the line from ambiguous to hard-to-deny? Maybe I don't understand what kind of clarity you're trying to achieve here. This particular area of law or even just type of "fairness" is by necessity very muddy, there isn't a set of well-defined rules you can follow that will guarantee an outcome where everyone is happy no matter what, sometimes you have to step back and evaluate how people feel about things at various steps along the way. I'd speculate that OAI's attempts to reach out to SJ are probably the result of those evaluations - "this seems like it could make her people upset, so maybe we should pay her to not be mad?"
  - mewpmewp2 2y ago
    What if they hired 10 different voice actors with no intent to have someone like SJ, but one voice actor actually did sound like from Her so they liked it the most and decided to go with it. And if only after the fact they realized that it is quite similar to SJ in general and decided to reach out to her and also went along with the Her idea due to obvious similarities?
tptacek 2y ago
A random person's normal speaking voice is nobody's intellectual property. The burden would have been on SJ to prove that the voice actor they hired was "impersonating" SJ. She was not: the Washington Post got her to record a voice sample to illustrate that she wasn't doing an impersonation. Unless & until some 3rd other shoe drops, what we know now strongly --- overwhelmingly, really --- suggests that there was simply no story here. But we are all biased towards there being an interesting story behind everything, especially when it ratifies our casting of good guys and bad guys.
- qarl 2y ago
  If "Her" weren't Sam's favorite movie, and if Sam hadn't tweeted "her" the day it launched, and if they hadn't asked SJ to do the voice, and if they hadn't tried to reach her again two days before the launch, and if half the people who first heard the voice said "Hey, isn't that SJ?" - Then I'd say you have a point. But given all the other info, I'd have to say you're in denial.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    That's not how any of this works.
    - qarl 2y ago
      I'm just listing known facts.
    - realfeel78 2y ago
      Wrong.
- HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
  > the Washington Post got her to record a voice sample Actually it only says they reviewed "brief recordings of her initial voice test", which I assume refers to the voice test she did for OpenAI. The "impersonating SJ" thing seems a straw man someone made up. The OpenAI talent call was for "warm, engaging, charismatic" voices sounding like 25-45 yr old (I assume SJ would have qualified, given that Altman specifically wanted her). They reviewed 400 applicants meeting this filtering criteria, and it seems threw away 395 of the ones that didn't remind Altman of SJ. It's a bit like natural selection and survival of the fittest. Take 400 giraffes, kill the 395 shortest ones, and the rest will all be tall. Go figure.

Alupis 2y ago

I cannot read the article because of it's paywall - is there actual proof OpenAI reached out to Johansson - or is it just being alleged by her lawyers? It seems she has every reason to benefit from claiming Sky sounded like her even if it was a coincidence. "Go away" payments are very common, even for celebrities - and OpenAI has deep pockets... Even so, if they got a voice actor to impersonate or sound similar to Johansson, is that something that's not allowed?

srockets 2y ago
If her lawyers are half competent, then they wouldn’t lie. They may not tell the whole truth, but we’re not discussing what wasn’t said here. As for your second question, yes. Otherwise you have a perfect workaround that would mean a person likeness is free-for-all to use, but we already decided that is not acceptable.
- Alupis 2y ago
  > Otherwise you have a perfect workaround that would mean a person likeness is free-for-all to use, but we already decided that is not acceptable That is not decided. There have been high profile cases were someone's likeness was explicitly used without permission, and they still had no recourse. It was argued the person was notable enough they could not protect their likeness. Regardless, it appears debated if Sky even sounded like Johansson, which will make this very difficult for anyone to argue (being subjective and all). If the Sky voice actor was recorded prior to engaging with Johansson (which has been claimed by OpenAI), then it seems even more difficult to argue. In the end, this will net Johansson a nice "go away" payday and then everyone will forget about it.
mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
>Even so, if they got a voice actor to impersonate or sound similar to Johansson, is that something that's not allowed? Correct, that is not allowed in the US.
HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
Johansson is a super successful actress and no doubt rejects 95% of roles offered to her, just as she rejected Altman's request to be the voice of ChatGPT. She doesn't need "go away" payments, and in any case that is not what we're looking at here. OpenAI offered her money to take the part, and she said no. According to celebrity net worth website, SJ is worth $165M.
- Alupis 2y ago
  > Johansson is a super successful actress and no doubt rejects 95% of roles offered to her > She doesn't need "go away" payments > According to celebrity net worth website, SJ is worth $165M. I have no idea what Johansson's estimated net worth, or her acting career have to do with this? Wealthy people sue all the time for all kinds of ridiculous things. The voice is, in fact, not Johansson. Yet, it appears she will be suing them non-the-less... It's not illegal to sound like someone else - despite what people might be claiming. If it turns out to be true that Sky's voice actor was recorded prior to the attempted engagement with Johansson, then all of this is extra absurd. Also, Sky doesn't sound like Johansson anyway... but apparently that isn't going to matter in this situation.
  - NBJack 2y ago
    Miller v. Ford Motor Co. would disagree. There is a viable legal precedent, and it is very arguably illegal. > The appellate court ruled that the voice of someone famous as a singer is distinctive to their person and image and therefore, as a part of their identity, it is unlawful to imitate their voice without express consent and approval. The appellate court reversed the district court's decision and ruled in favor of Midler, indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
    - throwthrowuknow 2y ago
      They’d have to prove the voice actor was imitating SJ. If OpenAI recorded the entire interview process as well as the sessions where they recorded the actor for samples to steer the model with then it should be open and shut. There’s also the fact of the 4 other voices. Who are they meant to be?

kstrauser 2y ago

Please don't take this as me defending OpenAI's clearly sketchy process. I'm writing this to help myself think through it. If it weren't for their attempt to link the voice to SJ (i.e. with the "her" tweet), would that be OK? - It's fine to hire a voice actor. - It's fine to train a system to sound like that voice actor. - It's fine to hire a voice actor who sounds like someone else. - It's probably fine to go out of your way to hire a voice actor who sounds like someone else. - It's probably not fine to hire a voice actor and tell them to imitate someone else. - It's very likely not fine to market your AI as "sounds like Jane Doe, who sounds like SJ". - It's definitely not fine to market your AI as "sounds like SJ". Say I wanted to make my AI voice sound like Patrick Stewart. Surely it's OK to hire an English actor who sounds a lot like him, so long as I don't use Sir Patrick's name in the advertising. If so, would it have been OK for OpenAI to do all this as long as they didn't mention SJ? Or is SJ so clearly identifiable with her role in "Her" that it's never OK to try to make a product like "Her" that sounds like SJ?

kevingadd 2y ago
When it comes to whether something is "wrong", in general intent matters a lot and what they did was communicate an obvious intent. There are certainly ways they could have avoided doing so, and I'm not sure I understand the value of trying to dissect it into a dozen tiny pieces and debate which particular detail pushes it over the line from ambiguous to hard-to-deny? Maybe I don't understand what kind of clarity you're trying to achieve here. This particular area of law or even just type of "fairness" is by necessity very muddy, there isn't a set of well-defined rules you can follow that will guarantee an outcome where everyone is happy no matter what, sometimes you have to step back and evaluate how people feel about things at various steps along the way. I'd speculate that OAI's attempts to reach out to SJ are probably the result of those evaluations - "this seems like it could make her people upset, so maybe we should pay her to not be mad?"
- mewpmewp2 2y ago
  What if they hired 10 different voice actors with no intent to have someone like SJ, but one voice actor actually did sound like from Her so they liked it the most and decided to go with it. And if only after the fact they realized that it is quite similar to SJ in general and decided to reach out to her and also went along with the Her idea due to obvious similarities?

tptacek 2y ago

A random person's normal speaking voice is nobody's intellectual property. The burden would have been on SJ to prove that the voice actor they hired was "impersonating" SJ. She was not: the Washington Post got her to record a voice sample to illustrate that she wasn't doing an impersonation. Unless & until some 3rd other shoe drops, what we know now strongly --- overwhelmingly, really --- suggests that there was simply no story here. But we are all biased towards there being an interesting story behind everything, especially when it ratifies our casting of good guys and bad guys.

qarl 2y ago
If "Her" weren't Sam's favorite movie, and if Sam hadn't tweeted "her" the day it launched, and if they hadn't asked SJ to do the voice, and if they hadn't tried to reach her again two days before the launch, and if half the people who first heard the voice said "Hey, isn't that SJ?" - Then I'd say you have a point. But given all the other info, I'd have to say you're in denial.
- tptacek 2y ago
  That's not how any of this works.
  - qarl 2y ago
    I'm just listing known facts.
  - realfeel78 2y ago
    Wrong.
HarHarVeryFunny 2y ago
> the Washington Post got her to record a voice sample Actually it only says they reviewed "brief recordings of her initial voice test", which I assume refers to the voice test she did for OpenAI. The "impersonating SJ" thing seems a straw man someone made up. The OpenAI talent call was for "warm, engaging, charismatic" voices sounding like 25-45 yr old (I assume SJ would have qualified, given that Altman specifically wanted her). They reviewed 400 applicants meeting this filtering criteria, and it seems threw away 395 of the ones that didn't remind Altman of SJ. It's a bit like natural selection and survival of the fittest. Take 400 giraffes, kill the 395 shortest ones, and the rest will all be tall. Go figure.