Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

waxy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 219 posts

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#61

Post by jskek9 »

kauffj wrote: post #51

CEO of LBRY here. These videos are welcome on LBRY. We'll have to get a real (i.e. not me commenting on HN) legal opinion should we get a take down request, but prima facie I don't see why these would be illegal. (If they are illegal and we are notified, we would put them on the company maintained blacklist, as we cannot remove anything from the network itself.) Edit: I wrote a rap on our perspective. If you're havin…

So your business model is built on the presumption of possessing an inviolable license to simulate the likeness of others?

I’m not so sure that’s a stable basis given a lot of laws celebrities have gotten passed protecting control of their likeness.

This is a bit of a “I’m doing it on a computer so it’s different!” kind of thing that won’t necessarily legally fly.

Challenging the idea that someone can’t control the reproduction of their likeness full stop is settled in the general sense in law. Context shifting how the reproduction happens isn’t really much a difference maker.

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#62

Post by jerrysievert »

paypalcust83 wrote: post #38
Smoosh wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, AC/DC were young once. Their lead singer died from partying too hard ffs.

I saw AC/DC in concert too. These guys were naked, doing backflips, bouncing off the walls, and breaking shit. Unless you're a sick puppy, hard living doesn't translate to entertainment value. I don't condone or value anyone's recreational extremophilia and I think your one-sided white-knighting is off-base.

that sounds an awful lot like The Impotent Sea Snakes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impotent_Sea_Snakes

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#63

Post by jskek9 »

wayneftw wrote: post #52

I went and found them and listened to them out of spite. Thanks for bringing my attention to this Jay-Z!

He’s weeping so hard. Oh wait that’s champagne bubbles streaming down his cheeks.

“What’s that web chud? Can’t hear your impotent rage over my actually baller life!”

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#64

Post by Animats »

This was approached all wrong. The first highly publicized demos of singing generated like this should have been of dead people - Michael Jackson, John Lennon, Elvis. First, it's not clear who has the right to sue, and in what jurisdiction. Rights associated with those people have been transferred and resold enough times that there's no clear claimant. Second, many people have impersonated those voices, so there's a strong argument that this is just automating a manual process. Someone could have probably gotten a few tracks out the door and onto airplay before the first litigation.

Going up against a living performer whose main asset is their vocal style makes a weaker case. Living people have stronger publicity rights than the estates of dead ones. This could result in a decision which expands the scope of copyright. One of those weird copyright decisions, like the one where Owens-Corning trademarked PINK, as a color, for insulation. Coloring insulation was so unusual that it was held to be a valid trademark. Now there are other copyright on colors. Bad cases make bad law.

This thing has been botched so badly that one wonders if it's a fake case from the music industry to get a losing decision.

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#65

Post by OrgNet »

Animats wrote: post #64

This was approached all wrong. The first highly publicized demos of singing generated like this should have been of dead people - Michael Jackson, John Lennon, Elvis. First, it's not clear who has the right to sue, and in what jurisdiction. Rights associated with those people have been transferred and resold enough times that there's no clear claimant. Second, many people have impersonated those voices, so there's a…

dead people's copyrighted work sues for copyright issues all the time... not sure how that would help.

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#66

Post by braythwayt »

anon73044 wrote: post #43
rhema wrote: post #20

Lots of examples of their synthesis here: https://lbry.tv/@VocalSynthesis:2?page=1 . I've been thinking about the deepfakes as a kind of computational thinking aid. We can all simulate reading text from the voice of random celebrities in our mind's eye. How different is the ability to bring that imagination into reality?

What with Jeff Bridges in Tron and Peter Cushing in Rogue One, I'd suspect in about a decade or so we'll begin seeing Disney movies with an almost full cast of deceased CG actors, complete with their own voice.

I feel like I missed something--what about Jeff Bridges in Tron? Or are we talking about Tron:Legacy, and the character of CLU?

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#67

Post by r00t_ »

kauffj wrote: post #51

CEO of LBRY here. These videos are welcome on LBRY. We'll have to get a real (i.e. not me commenting on HN) legal opinion should we get a take down request, but prima facie I don't see why these would be illegal. (If they are illegal and we are notified, we would put them on the company maintained blacklist, as we cannot remove anything from the network itself.) Edit: I wrote a rap on our perspective. If you're havin…

Absolutely in love with lbry.tv! Had the desktop app for awhile, didn't know the website existed. Thanks! :)

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#68

Post by pc86 »

areoform wrote: post #57
kauffj wrote: post #51

CEO of LBRY here. These videos are welcome on LBRY. We'll have to get a real (i.e. not me commenting on HN) legal opinion should we get a take down request, but prima facie I don't see why these would be illegal. (If they are illegal and we are notified, we would put them on the company maintained blacklist, as we cannot remove anything from the network itself.) Edit: I wrote a rap on our perspective. If you're havin…

While I appreciate your hustle here, it might not be such a good idea to become the hub for deepfakes and the endless lawsuits they will invite. The deep ethical issues involved should make anyone pause, but taking on record companies and artists should make you pause further. Everyone loves Napster as a history lesson. But it is doubtful that anyone would want to live it. Your position seems to be inviting all of th…

There are no ethical issues in deepfake videos that weren't existent during the same infantile stages of faked and Photoshopped images on the internet. Some people could pick them out immediately. Some people are fooled even by obvious fakes. That will never change.

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#69

Post by indecisive_user »

throwaway_USD wrote: post #19
acomjean wrote: post #5

Bette Midler sued ford back in the day (1988) for hiring an impersonator to sing on an ad and won. (Of course it helped that Ford asked her to sing first) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co . "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 expres…

In 2015 I had an unusual solicitation from a recruiter on LinkedIn - as a lawyer this in my experience is a rarity unlike tech where I understand it to be common place - with interest in offering me a General Counsel position with Romero Britto's Company. Turns out Apple engaged in discussions to license (or maybe commissioning) Britto's Art, but then Apple turned around and essentially just "knocked off" of Britto's…

I lived in South Florida for a while. That art style is so recognizable that I immediately knew where the Apple ad came from, though I didn't know the artist's name.

How do you even begin to quantify the 'likeness' of one piece of art to another though? In this case it sounds easy enough since they consulted with the artist beforehand, but what if they ripped off his style without ever talking to him, how do you prove it's a copyright infringement?

Re: With questionable copyright claim, Jay-Z orders deepfake parodies off YouTube

#70

Post by hjb »

Animats wrote: post #64

This was approached all wrong. The first highly publicized demos of singing generated like this should have been of dead people - Michael Jackson, John Lennon, Elvis. First, it's not clear who has the right to sue, and in what jurisdiction. Rights associated with those people have been transferred and resold enough times that there's no clear claimant. Second, many people have impersonated those voices, so there's a…

> One of those weird copyright decisions, like the one where Owens-Corning trademarked PINK

Trademarks and copyright are NOT the same thing. That trademark would only give them rights to the branding PINK in the context of insulation. Copyright is more expansive - and I think you should be more worried about copyright than trademark.

Post reply on HN