4 ms·

If it goes to court, it will be an interesting case and may have big ramifications. I believe the person used was selected because she sounded like Scarlett.

by jmclnx 2y ago

If it goes to court, it will be an interesting case and may have big ramifications. I believe the person used was selected because she sounded like Scarlett. If guilty, will it be illegal for people sounding like famous people get voice work ? I have heard ads with people sounding like various US Presidents over the years, could doing that be illegal ?

tensor 2y ago
Surely there must be precedence here. This can't be the first time people hired sound-a-like voice actors for something.
- delecti 2y ago
  Yes, and a case with a lot of similarity too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
  - quasse 2y ago
    This is interesting because the district court seems to initially have decided the opposite of Tom Waits vs Frito Lay (http://tomwaitslibrary.info/biography/copyright/frito-lay/ http://tomwaitslibrary.info/biography/copyright/frito-lay/). Looks like the appellate court came to the same conclusion though, a famous person's voice is distinctive to their identity and intentionally imitating it is a type of false association claim.
    - CRConrad 2y ago
      Yes, AIUI from discussion here last week, Waits used the final Midler verdict as precedent.
freejazz 2y ago
> If guilty, will it be illegal for people sounding like famous people get voice work ? It continues to baffle me that people formulate this issue as it just being about the similar voices as opposed to OpenAI's efforts to capitalize on ScarJo's likeness by making explicit references to ScarJo and her work, in combination with using a similar voice. Obviously, it is not against the law to have a similar voice as someone. Obviously, it is against the law to capitalize upon another person's likeness without their permission. I don't understand why people pretend it's hard to distinguish between the two categories, it's not.
- vessenes 2y ago
  Just to be clear here, which of these two circumstances do you believe is at play in the johannsen v OpenAI dispute?
- opello 2y ago
  > Obviously, it is against the law to capitalize upon another person's likeness without their permission. This seems similar to MikeRoweSoft.com[1] which was ultimately settled instead of being tested in court. Maybe closer, does this line of thinking mean that the twins Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson[2] couldn't have distinct professional acting careers without one another's explicit permission because of their similarity (capitalized on for Full House) as one would necessarily infringe on the likeness of the other? That seems like a bridge too far. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._MikeRoweSoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._MikeRoweSoft [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary-Kate_and_Ashley_Olsen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary-Kate_and_Ashley_Olsen
  - freejazz 2y ago
    >Maybe closer, does this line of thinking mean that the twins Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson[2] couldn't have distinct professional acting careers without one another's explicit permission because of their similarity (capitalized on for Full House) as one would necessarily infringe on the likeness of the other? That seems like a bridge too far. What line of thinking? Right of publicity laws are not new. If one of the twins purported to be the other, yes, why wouldn't the other twin have a claim? What is controversial about that?
    - opello 2y ago
      > If one of the twins purported to be the other, yes, why wouldn't the other twin have a claim? I agree that attribution is key. Since identical twins are often confused, the issue resolves itself with credit. But absent some attribution or credit, it seems like there would be a similar problem in the case of twins. This seems like why credits in works of entertainment are particularly important. I'm just left wondering if OpenAI discloses who provided the voice and that person isn't prohibited from entering the marketplace of "voice work" (which would seem unfair?) then it seems like this would fizzle out?
bgentry 2y ago
What if I look like a famous actor/actress or model? Should I not be allowed to act or model professionally? Or if I sound like a famous singer, should I not be allowed to sing for profit? What if my paintings have a similar style to a famous painter, should I not be allowed to paint for a living?
- threeseed 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - bgentry 2y ago
    Fairly sure I understand the public details about this situation. We have at least one newspaper that has reviewed recordings or footage from the voice actor and confirmed that the OpenAI voice is a direct match for her actual regular speaking voice. We also have records illustrating that the CEO had no direct involvement in the hiring of the voice talent, and that there was no direction given for her to "sound like 'Her'". Without any evidence that OpenAI set out to intentionally find someone who sounded like a fictional character, why should this individual be prevented from seeking work as a voice actor in any capacity?
  - orangecat 2y ago
    They wanted Scarlett Johansson specifically, couldn't get her and then hired someone They hired the Sky voice actress well before contacting SJ. with the intent to convince the public it was her. The only evidence for this is Sam's "her" tweet, which can easily be referring to the concept of a realistically-voiced AI assistant rather than SJ in particular.
    - notaustinpowers 2y ago
      > They hired the Sky voice actress well before contacting SJ. Then why would they need to contact SJ 2 days before the release? If they already had the Sky voice complete? If there wouldn't be enough time to have SJ record everything for the voice? To me, it doesn't pass the sniff test. Either their talent department is just really bad at planning and had no clue it was releasing just two days later (unlikely), or they were trying to get an agreement signed with her before the release, anticipating that this would happen (likely).
sandworm101 2y ago
No. Contrary to layperson belief, there is little new in deepfakes. People have been faking the image of celebs for many years decades (SNL) and faking their personality even further (Hustler v Falwell, Lohan v GTA). The porn industry has an entire genre dedicated to parodies of famous people and famous situations. And there are the professional celeb lookalikes. Every historical film involves someone trying to mimic a real person. Imagine if Winston Churchill's estate started going after every actor who has ever used "his" accent without permission. All of those are situations where the mimicry was done blatantly and openly. This is a case where the mimicry is contested at best. The only hope would be to somehow prove literal copying, her voice fed into that software. And pity every other upcoming actor who looks/sounds vaguely similar to an existing famous person. Shall they be gagged, the very sound of their voice owned by someone else?
- freejazz 2y ago
  Is literal copying a necessary element for a right of publicity claim? I don't think so, but I don't litigate them. I would think that OpenAI's conduct in referencing ScarJo and her body of work in relation to the voice would allow for a reasonable inference that they intended the public to believe it was ScarJo's voice, and not that of a similarly sounding voice actor? from the article: "It doesn’t matter whether a person’s actual voice is used in an imitation or not, Rothman says, only whether that audio confuses listeners" Do you have non-layman knowledge about these kinds of claims?
- bryanlarsen 2y ago
  That's fair use. Fair use is limited to commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, and scholarship. OpenAI will try and claim fair use, but I don't think they'll succeed.
  - sandworm101 2y ago
    Fair use only applies to copyrighted material. A voice, a mode of speech, is not copyrightable. Step one in a copyright defense it to prove that no "taking" occurred, or that any involved material wasn't protected by copyright (Lohan v. GTA). Only then do you get to affirmative defenses such as fair use (Hustler). This case would not get that far, not absent evidence of literal copies of her recorded voice being played back by the software.
HenryBemis 2y ago
I will assume that imitating Reagan to sell X products (that are not insulting the to the memory of Reagan) would be "ok". But Reagan is dead, and I don't feel that using a voice similar to his (or Clinton's who's still alive) removes bread from their table. If everyone deliberately starts using a voice 'like' Johansson's, or the image 'like' Johansson's, that would steal the bread from her table. I don't know if there are laws/cases covering 'lookalikes' but it's kinda like that.
pyeri 2y ago
I think it might go the Google vs Oracle way. The courts might do the right and ethical thing (Google wins) but the basis will be a specific workaround (fair use of APIs) instead of something beneficial for society as a whole (APIs can't be copyrighted).
justin66 2y ago
> If guilty, will it be illegal for people sounding like famous people get voice work ? The question implies that you believe a professional voice actor has a single voice they can use. That is a silly thing to believe.
- anonymousab 2y ago
  What if it was their natural voice and cadence? People can sound alike or even identical.
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    People can sound alike, but if you hire someone because they sound like someone famous hoping people believe you hired the famous person, that's bad.
- fxd123 2y ago
  OpenAI's claim is that they used the voice actors' natural voice > That is a silly thing to believe. I think it's silly to believe that celebrities should own voices

by jmclnx 2y ago

tensor 2y ago

Surely there must be precedence here. This can't be the first time people hired sound-a-like voice actors for something.

delecti 2y ago
Yes, and a case with a lot of similarity too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
- quasse 2y ago
  This is interesting because the district court seems to initially have decided the opposite of Tom Waits vs Frito Lay (http://tomwaitslibrary.info/biography/copyright/frito-lay/ http://tomwaitslibrary.info/biography/copyright/frito-lay/). Looks like the appellate court came to the same conclusion though, a famous person's voice is distinctive to their identity and intentionally imitating it is a type of false association claim.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    Yes, AIUI from discussion here last week, Waits used the final Midler verdict as precedent.

freejazz 2y ago

> If guilty, will it be illegal for people sounding like famous people get voice work ? It continues to baffle me that people formulate this issue as it just being about the similar voices as opposed to OpenAI's efforts to capitalize on ScarJo's likeness by making explicit references to ScarJo and her work, in combination with using a similar voice. Obviously, it is not against the law to have a similar voice as someone. Obviously, it is against the law to capitalize upon another person's likeness without their permission. I don't understand why people pretend it's hard to distinguish between the two categories, it's not.

vessenes 2y ago
Just to be clear here, which of these two circumstances do you believe is at play in the johannsen v OpenAI dispute?
opello 2y ago
> Obviously, it is against the law to capitalize upon another person's likeness without their permission. This seems similar to MikeRoweSoft.com[1] which was ultimately settled instead of being tested in court. Maybe closer, does this line of thinking mean that the twins Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson[2] couldn't have distinct professional acting careers without one another's explicit permission because of their similarity (capitalized on for Full House) as one would necessarily infringe on the likeness of the other? That seems like a bridge too far. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._MikeRoweSoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._MikeRoweSoft [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary-Kate_and_Ashley_Olsen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary-Kate_and_Ashley_Olsen
- freejazz 2y ago
  >Maybe closer, does this line of thinking mean that the twins Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson[2] couldn't have distinct professional acting careers without one another's explicit permission because of their similarity (capitalized on for Full House) as one would necessarily infringe on the likeness of the other? That seems like a bridge too far. What line of thinking? Right of publicity laws are not new. If one of the twins purported to be the other, yes, why wouldn't the other twin have a claim? What is controversial about that?
  - opello 2y ago
    > If one of the twins purported to be the other, yes, why wouldn't the other twin have a claim? I agree that attribution is key. Since identical twins are often confused, the issue resolves itself with credit. But absent some attribution or credit, it seems like there would be a similar problem in the case of twins. This seems like why credits in works of entertainment are particularly important. I'm just left wondering if OpenAI discloses who provided the voice and that person isn't prohibited from entering the marketplace of "voice work" (which would seem unfair?) then it seems like this would fizzle out?

bgentry 2y ago

What if I look like a famous actor/actress or model? Should I not be allowed to act or model professionally? Or if I sound like a famous singer, should I not be allowed to sing for profit? What if my paintings have a similar style to a famous painter, should I not be allowed to paint for a living?

threeseed 2y ago
[flagged]
- bgentry 2y ago
  Fairly sure I understand the public details about this situation. We have at least one newspaper that has reviewed recordings or footage from the voice actor and confirmed that the OpenAI voice is a direct match for her actual regular speaking voice. We also have records illustrating that the CEO had no direct involvement in the hiring of the voice talent, and that there was no direction given for her to "sound like 'Her'". Without any evidence that OpenAI set out to intentionally find someone who sounded like a fictional character, why should this individual be prevented from seeking work as a voice actor in any capacity?
- orangecat 2y ago
  They wanted Scarlett Johansson specifically, couldn't get her and then hired someone They hired the Sky voice actress well before contacting SJ. with the intent to convince the public it was her. The only evidence for this is Sam's "her" tweet, which can easily be referring to the concept of a realistically-voiced AI assistant rather than SJ in particular.
  - notaustinpowers 2y ago
    > They hired the Sky voice actress well before contacting SJ. Then why would they need to contact SJ 2 days before the release? If they already had the Sky voice complete? If there wouldn't be enough time to have SJ record everything for the voice? To me, it doesn't pass the sniff test. Either their talent department is just really bad at planning and had no clue it was releasing just two days later (unlikely), or they were trying to get an agreement signed with her before the release, anticipating that this would happen (likely).

sandworm101 2y ago

No. Contrary to layperson belief, there is little new in deepfakes. People have been faking the image of celebs for many years decades (SNL) and faking their personality even further (Hustler v Falwell, Lohan v GTA). The porn industry has an entire genre dedicated to parodies of famous people and famous situations. And there are the professional celeb lookalikes. Every historical film involves someone trying to mimic a real person. Imagine if Winston Churchill's estate started going after every actor who has ever used "his" accent without permission. All of those are situations where the mimicry was done blatantly and openly. This is a case where the mimicry is contested at best. The only hope would be to somehow prove literal copying, her voice fed into that software. And pity every other upcoming actor who looks/sounds vaguely similar to an existing famous person. Shall they be gagged, the very sound of their voice owned by someone else?

freejazz 2y ago
Is literal copying a necessary element for a right of publicity claim? I don't think so, but I don't litigate them. I would think that OpenAI's conduct in referencing ScarJo and her body of work in relation to the voice would allow for a reasonable inference that they intended the public to believe it was ScarJo's voice, and not that of a similarly sounding voice actor? from the article: "It doesn’t matter whether a person’s actual voice is used in an imitation or not, Rothman says, only whether that audio confuses listeners" Do you have non-layman knowledge about these kinds of claims?
bryanlarsen 2y ago
That's fair use. Fair use is limited to commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, and scholarship. OpenAI will try and claim fair use, but I don't think they'll succeed.
- sandworm101 2y ago
  Fair use only applies to copyrighted material. A voice, a mode of speech, is not copyrightable. Step one in a copyright defense it to prove that no "taking" occurred, or that any involved material wasn't protected by copyright (Lohan v. GTA). Only then do you get to affirmative defenses such as fair use (Hustler). This case would not get that far, not absent evidence of literal copies of her recorded voice being played back by the software.

HenryBemis 2y ago

I will assume that imitating Reagan to sell X products (that are not insulting the to the memory of Reagan) would be "ok". But Reagan is dead, and I don't feel that using a voice similar to his (or Clinton's who's still alive) removes bread from their table. If everyone deliberately starts using a voice 'like' Johansson's, or the image 'like' Johansson's, that would steal the bread from her table. I don't know if there are laws/cases covering 'lookalikes' but it's kinda like that.

pyeri 2y ago

I think it might go the Google vs Oracle way. The courts might do the right and ethical thing (Google wins) but the basis will be a specific workaround (fair use of APIs) instead of something beneficial for society as a whole (APIs can't be copyrighted).

justin66 2y ago

> If guilty, will it be illegal for people sounding like famous people get voice work ? The question implies that you believe a professional voice actor has a single voice they can use. That is a silly thing to believe.

anonymousab 2y ago
What if it was their natural voice and cadence? People can sound alike or even identical.
- KittenInABox 2y ago
  People can sound alike, but if you hire someone because they sound like someone famous hoping people believe you hired the famous person, that's bad.
fxd123 2y ago
OpenAI's claim is that they used the voice actors' natural voice > That is a silly thing to believe. I think it's silly to believe that celebrities should own voices