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

Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 195 posts

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#21

Post by vbeeaz »

krisoft wrote: post #17
vbeeaz wrote: post #2

"unauthorized" is a weasel word because it implies that it should be necessary for the developer to ask David Attenborough for authorization to create a clone of his voice using AI.

> "unauthorized" is a weasel word Is not a weasel word. There is nothing unambiguous about it. > it implies that it should be necessary for the developer to ask David Attenborough for authorization Yes. It does. Now you might disagree with that, but it perfectly unambiguously means that.

It is ambiguous because it makes it sound like we are talking legality here, but there's nothing illegal about making a project like this if you do not profit from it. Therefore, it is a weasel word.

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#22

Post by orbital-decay »

TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #9
vbeeaz wrote: post #2

"unauthorized" is a weasel word because it implies that it should be necessary for the developer to ask David Attenborough for authorization to create a clone of his voice using AI.

Right of publicity. https://www.inta.org/topics/right-of-publicity/

Does fair use apply here? (I don't know) It's not like the author narrates a full-blown wildlife movie with the voice of David Attenborough. It's just a funny demo which doesn't depend on the specific voice (could be anyone), and also makes it clear the voice is synthetic.

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#23

Post by tantalor »

orbital-decay wrote: post #22
TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right of publicity. https://www.inta.org/topics/right-of-publicity/

Does fair use apply here? (I don't know) It's not like the author narrates a full-blown wildlife movie with the voice of David Attenborough. It's just a funny demo which doesn't depend on the specific voice (could be anyone), and also makes it clear the voice is synthetic.

It is not clear that the voice is synthetic

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#24

Post by BSDobelix »

vbeeaz wrote: post #21
krisoft wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "unauthorized" is a weasel word Is not a weasel word. There is nothing unambiguous about it. > it implies that it should be necessary for the developer to ask David Attenborough for authorization Yes. It does. Now you might disagree with that, but it perfectly unambiguously means that.

It is ambiguous because it makes it sound like we are talking legality here, but there's nothing illegal about making a project like this if you do not profit from it. Therefore, it is a weasel word.

I think you're right, as long as it's clearly labelled as AI-generated.

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#25

Post by alpaca128 »

fotcorn wrote: post #20
belugacat wrote: post #8

Right now this requires API tokens and being dependent on third party companies that will cut off your access if they decide they don’t like you. The moment these models can run locally on the kind of cheap hardware that phone scam operations have will be the real Pandora’s box moment. (I give it 3-5 years or so)

The recently released XTTS-v2 model[0] from coqui.ai is coming very close to what ElevenLabs[1] can do. It runs reasonably fast on a recent GPU, and should also work on CPU. Requires a 3 second (!) clip of the voice you want to clone. License does not allow commercial use. 0: https://huggingface.co/coqui/XTTS-v2 1: https://elevenlabs.io/

> Requires a 3 second (!) clip of the voice you want to clone.

Sure, if you want a guaranteed uncanny valley experience. There is no way a few seconds are enough to cover all the ways a specific person pronounces things. A person's voice is much more than just the pitch and with a 3 second sample anyone who knows them will be able to tell something's off within 3 seconds.

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#26

Post by orbital-decay »

tantalor wrote: post #23
orbital-decay wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does fair use apply here? (I don't know) It's not like the author narrates a full-blown wildlife movie with the voice of David Attenborough. It's just a funny demo which doesn't depend on the specific voice (could be anyone), and also makes it clear the voice is synthetic.

It is not clear that the voice is synthetic

Hold on, are we looking at the same video and Twitter message? [1] He clearly states what he's doing, and in the video he launches some program that appears to speak in Attenborough's voice. How clear is clear enough?

[1] https://nitter.woodland.cafe/charliebholtz/status/1724815159...

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#27

Post by thaumasiotes »

krisoft wrote: post #17
vbeeaz wrote: post #2

"unauthorized" is a weasel word because it implies that it should be necessary for the developer to ask David Attenborough for authorization to create a clone of his voice using AI.

> "unauthorized" is a weasel word Is not a weasel word. There is nothing unambiguous about it. > it implies that it should be necessary for the developer to ask David Attenborough for authorization Yes. It does. Now you might disagree with that, but it perfectly unambiguously means that.

What? It means nothing of the kind.

Have you never heard about unauthorized biographies?

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#29

Post by dcchambers »

Chris2048 wrote: post #15
dcchambers wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. If this could be created without using recordings of his voice to train the model, then sure. I agree a "sound-alike" like that is fair game. But since actual recordings of his voice were used in order to train the model to recreate the sound, inflection, cadence, etc...it should be required to get authorization to use those recordings for this purpose.

> But since actual recordings of his voice were used in order to train Tell that to all the ppl who contributed to Co-Pilots training set..

I have the same reservations

That said, I think there's a slight difference in that this is targeting a specific individual.

Re: Unauthorized "David Attenborough" AI clone narrates developer's life, goes viral

#30

Post by petemir »

orbital-decay wrote: post #26
tantalor wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not clear that the voice is synthetic

Hold on, are we looking at the same video and Twitter message? [1] He clearly states what he's doing, and in the video he launches some program that appears to speak in Attenborough's voice. How clear is clear enough? [1] https://nitter.woodland.cafe/charliebholtz/status/1724815159...

It’s not clear from the voice alone
Post reply on HN