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

171–180 of 1001 posts

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

#171

Post by omnicognate »

Comments full of people reading the headline and assuming that what OpenAI did here is fine because it's a different actress, but that's not how "Right of publicity" (*) laws work. The article itself explains that there is significant legal risk here:

> Mitch Glazier, the chief executive of the Recording Industry Association of America, said that Johansson may have a strong case against OpenAI if she brings forth a lawsuit.

> He compared Johansson’s case to one brought by the singer Bette Midler against the Ford Motor Co. in the 1980s. Ford asked Midler to use her voice in ads. After she declined, Ford hired an impersonator. A U.S. appellate court ruled in Midler’s favor, indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use.

> But Mark Humphrey, a partner and intellectual property lawyer at Mitchell, Silberberg and Knupp, said any potential jury probably would have to assess whether Sky’s voice is identifiable as Johansson.

> Several factors go against OpenAI, he said, namely Altman’s tweet and his outreach to Johansson in September and May. “It just begs the question: It’s like, if you use a different person, there was no intent for it to sound like Scarlett Johansson. Why are you reaching out to her two days before?” he said. “That would have to be explained.”

* A.K.A. "Personality rights": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

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

#172

Post by gr4vityWall »

TrackerFF wrote: post #156
contrarian1234 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this context they aren't "creators" because they don't create anything. These actors are not being compensated, b/c they're not actually performed any additional work or doing any acting If you record my voice at a conference and then create a synthetic replica.. why would I care? You didn't make me do any additional work or anything

So if someone created a deep fake porn video of you, that wouldn't bother you either? Because, after all, you didn't do any work or anything.

Not the person you replied to, but IMO it depends.

My reaction would never be "we must make it so people can't do deepfakes anymore". That would cause people to stop using it for positive/benign things as well. If someone is spreading deepfake porn of someone, and you could make the case that they are doing so in order to harm that person's reputation, then legal action would make sense, I think.

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

#173

Post by TrackerFF »

contrarian1234 wrote: post #160
TrackerFF wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It boils down to dollars and cents. Why should the creative sources (artists, actors, writers, etc.) be left out of the cut, while the tech companies are reaping the rewards? "But those stars are rich, they'll survive." Yeah, maybe - but the creative world is 0.001% wealthy people, and the rest being people that barely get by - and could earn more money by doing pretty much anything else. I get the argument about cop…

They won't become filthy rich based of any one person's voice b/c anyone else can create a synthetic replica as well (unless they have some secret training data or something). It becomes commodity and as free as the air. Voice acting ceases to be a real career but in exchange it becomes accessible to everyone for pennies

And where does this stop?

Say you wake up one day, and find out some AI copy made a digital twin/clone out of you. Your voice, your looks, your style of writing, your style of speaking. Everything that is you, they've cloned.

And then they use a digital you in commercials, movies, or whatever. And, of course, you're not entitled to a single cent - because it's not you, just something that looks, sounds, and acts like you. Hell, no mater how much you hate the use, there's nothing that can be done - because this is for the greater good of tech progress.

This is some pretty fundamental stuff that needs to be sorted out, ASAP.

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

#174

Post by Aerroon »

DharmaPolice wrote: post #158
pests wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's their natural voice. Are they not allowed to hire a person that sounds like... any famous person? Aren't others in this thread claiming how similar voices can be and theyre not unqiue?

I think the optics of this aren't great. You ask someone to copy their voice, they say no and then (maybe coincidentally) you release a voice designed to sound very similar. Legally this may well be fine but come on, didn't anyone think this might make them look bad?

Sure, but to me it looks bad from the other perspective too if this is made into a problem. A person's natural voice is their voice and some celebrity should NOT be able to dictate how it is used.

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

#175

Post by flexie »

resolutebat wrote: post #153
throwaway115 wrote: post #133

This whole thing is starting to feel like another Sam Altman spotlight production. There's enough evidence to show no wrongdoing, but it was handled in a way to make people think there was a scandal. Maximum spotlight for relatively low risk. I wonder if people will get tired of being jerked around like this.

I'm genuinely not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you claiming that this was somehow engineered by Altman on purpose to draw attention, because all publicity is good publicity? Or engineered by his enemies to throw mud at Altman, because if you throw enough some of it will stick? Occam's Razor argues that Sam simply wanted ScarJo's voice, but couldn't get it, so they came up with a legally probably technical…

It's not a clone. What is ethically murky about it?

You want Brad Pitt for your movie. He says no. You hire Benicio Del Toro because of the physical resemblence. Big deal.

Having seen "Her" and many other Scarlet Johansson movies, I didn't think for a second that GPT-4o sounded like her. On the contrary, I wondered why they had chosen the voice of a middle aged woman, and whether that was about being woke. It wasn't until social media went hysterical, I realized that the voices were sort of similar.

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

#176

Post by pseudosavant »

justeoghan wrote: post #163

I never comment on HN I’ve just always been a long time lurker but I feel like I’m going crazy here reading comments. SJ is not the “AI” portrayed in the movie her. And AFAIK she does not in fact have all the same idiosyncrasies and tones in real life as the voice does in the movie because she was in fact directed to act like that. Not only that but the voices are not the same because there was another actress for sk…

Exactly. Lots of voices sound like other peoples’ voices. We aren’t that unique.

SJ doesn’t get to own the voice rights to everyone that sounds at all like her just because she is famous.

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

#177

Post by r2_pilot »

TrackerFF wrote: post #156
contrarian1234 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this context they aren't "creators" because they don't create anything. These actors are not being compensated, b/c they're not actually performed any additional work or doing any acting If you record my voice at a conference and then create a synthetic replica.. why would I care? You didn't make me do any additional work or anything

So if someone created a deep fake porn video of you, that wouldn't bother you either? Because, after all, you didn't do any work or anything.

Look, we're all just wearing these meat bags for a little while. I personally don't know anyone who would care if I was deep-faked in a porn, it wouldn't have any professional consequences (why would my boss, or friends for that matter, watch it in the first place?), and ultimately it's as ficticious as Lord of the Rings. Really, people get too riled up about salacious bits in the first place while we're on the subject.

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

#178

Post by throwaway115 »

resolutebat wrote: post #153
throwaway115 wrote: post #133

This whole thing is starting to feel like another Sam Altman spotlight production. There's enough evidence to show no wrongdoing, but it was handled in a way to make people think there was a scandal. Maximum spotlight for relatively low risk. I wonder if people will get tired of being jerked around like this.

I'm genuinely not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you claiming that this was somehow engineered by Altman on purpose to draw attention, because all publicity is good publicity? Or engineered by his enemies to throw mud at Altman, because if you throw enough some of it will stick? Occam's Razor argues that Sam simply wanted ScarJo's voice, but couldn't get it, so they came up with a legally probably technical…

I would like to think that a normal person, having not been able to hire voice work from a specific well-known actor, and wanting to avoid any image of impropriety, would use a completely different voice instead. Sam isn't dumb, he knew the optics of this choice, but he chose it anyways, and here we all are, talking about OpenAI again.

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

#179

Post by omnicognate »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #62
xyst wrote: post #57

I don’t think OpenAI has a chance to win this in open court. They are very likely to settle out of court. Investors get a bit anxious with pending litigation. But I honestly hope Johansson does not. She certainly has the runway to take it all the way. Make them look like fools in open court. Show the people their real colors.

Why do you feel OpenAI doesn't have a chance to win in court given the information presented in this WaPo article? It seems fairly conclusive to me.

Read up about "Right to publicity" laws or just read the article itself, which explains she may have a strong case against OpenAI here.

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

#180

Post by danparsonson »

DeathArrow wrote: post #170

Some people die due to hunger, some people die due to wars, some people die due to curable diseases, but somehow, what matters most for some folks is whether OpenAI copied the voice of Scarlett Johansson. Human mind is a curious place.

Some of us can hold more than one thought in our head at once.
Post reply on HN