3 ms·

that's generally the thrust of elvis laws, yes - I'm not sure they're coherent as a concept though. why is elvis impersonation "traditional" in a way that "dol

by paulmd 2y ago

that's generally the thrust of elvis laws, yes - I'm not sure they're coherent as a concept though. why is elvis impersonation "traditional" in a way that "dolly parton impersonation" is not? and let's not pretend like there wasn't always a significant commercial aspect, the elvis impersonator officiating your wedding wants to get paid.

smcin 2y ago
I don't understand the downvotes and you're changing the topic from deepfake AI porn (whether by individuals (schoolchildren, adults, revenge porn) or AI apps/ advertisers/ social media) to Elvis laws (prohibitions against unauthorized commercial use of AI voice/image/name, e.g. musician soundalike, as passed by Tennessee in 2024). I'm not defending either cyberbullying or any particular set of laws (and the Australian one hasn't even had its wording published yet), I'm just pointing out each country or state will act(/not act) differently. For Australia, I wonder about their claim they had 2.7x as much deepfake-porn cyberbullying as other countries. (Is Australia using NGOs to drum up support for invasive govt powers which would be used more widely? Will govts worldwide use alarm about deepfake porn as a pretext for sweeping power grabs?) >2% of TN's economy is music industry, so it's inevitable the state legislature will attempt to protect that from AI job loss as is clearly happening in other audiovisual industries; courts and time will tell. > why is elvis impersonation "traditional" in a way that "dolly parton impersonation" is not? I never said that was the case, I don't even know that that's specifically the case, but given you say it is, why do you think that is the case, and how is that related to this discussion? (Does it depend on how permissive/aggressive the rightsholder historically was on enforcing copyright? or else what?) Anyway, Tennessee rushed out a law (which doesn't even go into effect until July 2024) which on the face of it is not intended to target (human) amateur tribute acts, but AI impersonation. Is it overkill, like some suggest the Australian proposed criminal law could turn out to be? Will it be unenforceable/ appealed/ overturned in the SC...? Will other music-industry states like FL, NY, GA pass similar legislation? It's quite likely many countries' or states' AI-related legislation (or lack of) will be incoherent, this sector is changing too fast.

by paulmd 2y ago

smcin 2y ago

I don't understand the downvotes and you're changing the topic from deepfake AI porn (whether by individuals (schoolchildren, adults, revenge porn) or AI apps/ advertisers/ social media) to Elvis laws (prohibitions against unauthorized commercial use of AI voice/image/name, e.g. musician soundalike, as passed by Tennessee in 2024). I'm not defending either cyberbullying or any particular set of laws (and the Australian one hasn't even had its wording published yet), I'm just pointing out each country or state will act(/not act) differently. For Australia, I wonder about their claim they had 2.7x as much deepfake-porn cyberbullying as other countries. (Is Australia using NGOs to drum up support for invasive govt powers which would be used more widely? Will govts worldwide use alarm about deepfake porn as a pretext for sweeping power grabs?) >2% of TN's economy is music industry, so it's inevitable the state legislature will attempt to protect that from AI job loss as is clearly happening in other audiovisual industries; courts and time will tell. > why is elvis impersonation "traditional" in a way that "dolly parton impersonation" is not? I never said that was the case, I don't even know that that's specifically the case, but given you say it is, why do you think that is the case, and how is that related to this discussion? (Does it depend on how permissive/aggressive the rightsholder historically was on enforcing copyright? or else what?) Anyway, Tennessee rushed out a law (which doesn't even go into effect until July 2024) which on the face of it is not intended to target (human) amateur tribute acts, but AI impersonation. Is it overkill, like some suggest the Australian proposed criminal law could turn out to be? Will it be unenforceable/ appealed/ overturned in the SC...? Will other music-industry states like FL, NY, GA pass similar legislation? It's quite likely many countries' or states' AI-related legislation (or lack of) will be incoherent, this sector is changing too fast.