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

OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#771

Post by mzs »

tptacek wrote: post #653
zug_zug wrote: post #481

When I first used ChatGPT's voice assistant's I was like "Wow, this one is clearly Scarlett Johansson from Her, they even copy her mannerisms." No amount of unverifiable "records" (just pieces of paper provided by somebody who has a multimillion dollar incentive to show one outcome) will change my mind. But if they can produce the actual voice artist I'd be more open-minded.

They did produce the actual voice artist!

I don't see that here: https://openai.com/index/how-the-voices-for-chatgpt-were-cho...

Is my my google-fu failing me and I'm not looking in the right place?

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#772

Post by itronitron »

tptacek wrote: post #670
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly an SJ voice was the goal, given that Altman asked her to do it, asked her a second time just two days before the ChatGPT-4o release, and then tweeted "her" on the release day. The next day Karpathy, recently ex-OpenAI, then tweets "The killer app of LLMs is Scarlett Johansson". Altman appears to be an habitual liar. Note his recent claim not to be aware of the non-disparagement and claw-back terms he had depa…

They hired the actor that did the voice months before they contacted SJ . The reaction on this site to the news that this story was false is kind of mindbending.

>> They hired the actor that did the voice months before they contacted SJ.

Are you saying that story is false?

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#773

Post by kstrauser »

summerlight wrote: post #729
tptacek wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They hired the actor that did the voice months before they contacted SJ . The reaction on this site to the news that this story was false is kind of mindbending.

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.

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?

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#774

Post by paulddraper »

jmull wrote: post #631

Well, here are some things that aren't really being disputed: * OpenAI wanted an AI voice that sounds like SJ * SJ declined * OpenAI got an AI voice that sounds like SJ anyway I guess they want us to believe this happened without shenanigans, but it's bit hard to. The headline of the article is a little funny, because records can't really show they weren't looking for an SJ sound-alike. They can just show that those…

I don't understand.

If you literally use SJ's image or voice, then you're in trouble.

If it's an SJ lookalike or soundalike (and you don't claim otherwise), there's no problem.

Right? What's the "shenanigans?"

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#776

Post by bnralt »

sanderjd wrote: post #758
bnralt wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Even if you think OpenAI isn’t a good place, this is an investigation by an established newspaper that refuted some of the more serious accusations (that OpenAI got a Johannson impersonator - they didn’t, that they modified the voice to sound like Johansson - evidence suggests this didn’t happen). When the reaction is “I don’t care that an investigation refuted some of the accusations”, it demonstrates someone…

> refuted some of the more serious accusations (that OpenAI got a Johannson impersonator - they didn’t A lot of the argument here comes down to whether the article does refute that. I don't believe it does. What it refutes is the accusation that they hired someone who sounds like Johansson after she told them she would not do it herself. That was certainly a more damning accusation, but it's not an identical one. But…

> A lot of the argument here comes down to whether the article does refute that.

It clearly refutes the claims that they got a Johansson impersonator. The article says this is a voice actress, speaking in her normal voice, who wasn’t told to mimic Johansson at all. You can say that you personally think she was chosen because people thought she sounded similar to Johansson, even though there’s no evidence for that at this point. But the claim - which was made several times in discussions on here before - that she is a Johansson impersonator is factually incorrect.

> But in my view, it requires a pretty absurd level of benefit of the doubt to think that they didn't set out to make a voice that sounds like the one from the movie.

I tried it several times in the past and never once thought it sounded like Johansson. When this controversy came out I looked at videos of Her, because I thought Johansson could have been using a different voice in that movie, but no - the voice in her is immediately recognizable as Johannson’s. Some have said Sky’s was much closer to Rashida Jones, and I agree, though I don’t know how close.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#777

Post by bmitc »

z7 wrote: post #672
bmitc wrote: post #660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't mean anything. They could have been and were likely developing the process and technology while having Johansson in mind the whole time. > never had the movie Her or SJ's name mentioned to her a single time How do you know that?

The article says: >The agent, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to assure the safety of her client, said the actress confirmed that neither Johansson nor the movie “Her” were ever mentioned by OpenAI.

So an anonymous statement from a puff piece when multiple verifiable public records show OpenAI publicly mentioning Johansson and Her. Count me skeptical.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#778

Post by beeboobaa3 »

kstrauser wrote: post #773
summerlight wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

> It's probably not fine to hire a voice actor and tell them to imitate someone else.

Pretty sure this is fine, otherwise cartoons like the simpsons or south park would've gotten in trouble years ago.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#779

Post by kevingadd »

kstrauser wrote: post #773
summerlight wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

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?"

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#780

Post by pclmulqdq »

Athari wrote: post #763
mastax wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been cases where it was decided that a person had rights[0] to their distinctive voice, as an extension of the Right of Publicity[1]. For example Midler v. Ford Motor Co.[2], and one or two other cases I've seen mentioned but can't remember. [0]: Though not necessarily "copyrights"? [1]: https://higgslaw.com/celebrities-sue-over-unauthorized-use-o... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_…

Midler v. Ford is a poor comparison for this case specifically because of: 1. hiring an impersonator 2. copying a song 3. intending to confuse. If what OpenAI is saying is true, then none of the conditions apply. I'd say (1) is unlikely, (2) is very unlikely, and (3) is maybe, at least to some degree.

I would suggest that (3) is a solid "yes" given the other communications around this, and honestly the similarity of the final tone of voice.

Very little suggests an intent to confuse more than tweets from company leaders confirming that there was intent to confuse. What is left on the table is whether actual confusion occurred, which is different.

Post reply on HN