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

21–30 of 1001 posts

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

#21

Post by wokwokwok »

richardatlarge wrote: post #2

Quote from the Post article: But while many hear an eerie resemblance between “Sky” and Johansson’s “Her” character, an actress was hired to create the Sky voice months before Altman contacted Johansson, according to documents, recordings, casting directors and the actress’s agent.

He said, she said.

Maybe the courts can decide, rather than the court of popular opinion, when we don't have access to the actual evidence?

If they're that confident, why did they take the voice down?

What will they do if she continues legal action?

They can say anything, and all we know for sure, is that they're not honest, usually. So... lets see how it goes in court huh?

...but, I guess it won't; because they do not want that discovery. (:

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

#24

Post by palad1n »

skilled wrote: post #18

The thing that worried me initially was that: - the original report by Scarlett said she was approached months ago, and then two days prior to launch of GPT-4o she was approached again Because of the above, my immediate assumption was that OpenAI definitely did her dirty. But this report from WaPo debunks at least some of it, because the records they have seen show that the voice actor was contacted months in advance…

Yeah, sus af because of the call 2 days before they released it to the world. And they were just asking for it when they tweeted the frickin "her". I mean, come on.

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

#25

Post by CaptainFever »

hotdogscout wrote: post #6

A sensational lie spread much quicker than the truth even on HN, with no sign of course correction. I hope Sam feels fine after so much baseless harassment.

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.

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

#26

Post by lchengify »

jrockway wrote: post #10

I was perusing some Simpsons clips this afternoon and came across a story to the effect of "So and so didn't want to play himself, so Dan Castellaneta did the voice." It's a good impression and people didn't seem very upset about that. I am not sure how this is different. (Apparently this particular "impression" predates the Her character, so it's even easier to not be mad about. It's just a coincidence. They weren't…

> I was perusing some Simpsons clips this afternoon and came across a story to the effect of "So and so didn't want to play himself, so Dan Castellaneta did the voice."

IANAL, but parody and criticism are covered under Fair Use doctrine for Copyright law in the United States [1]. The Simpsons generally falls into that category, which is why they rarely get into trouble.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

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

#27

Post by Seattle3503 »

squigz wrote: post #15
pavlov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely there’s some kind of difference between “voice impression for a two-line cameo in one episode of an animated sitcom” and “reproducing your voice as the primary interface for a machine that could be used by billions of people and is worth hundreds of billions of dollars.” Is there a name for this AI fallacy? The one where programmers make an inductive leap like, for example, if a human can read one book to lear…

> for example, if a human can read one book to learn something, then it’s ok to scan millions of books into a computer system because it’s just another kind of learning. Since this comes up all the time , I ask: What exactly is the number of books a human can ingest before it becomes illegal?

For a human? Whatever they can consume within their natural life.

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

#28

Post by slim »

slim wrote: post #23

so how would the process of training a speaking AI go ? would you input the actor voice samples and subtitles from a movie, then train it till the output is similar enough to the actors voice from the movie ?

what test data would they use ?

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

#29

Post by joekinley »

I can't help but think that this was all planned. It is a very intricately planned, and geniously executed marketing ploy to make sure everyone knows about the company, the new release, that there is voice now, and even makes everyone look into it just to "see for themselves". Whether this was in with ScarJo in the loop or not, does not really change the outcome, but would be a nice information we probably will never get, in order to understand how cut-throat whoever came up with this idea actually is.

I am impressed

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

#30

Post by solidasparagus »

Ariel_Asura wrote: post #5

It seems increasingly difficult for common people to protect their voices, especially when even Scarlett Johansson can't manage it. As a part-time voice actor with a unique voice, I'm concerned about what I should do if my voice is used without permission and the company denies it. How can I protect myself in such a situation?

I don't have helpful advice for what you asked (spend the money to get a legal expert's opinion would be my advice), but if I was a voice actor, I would see three paths:

1. Push forward legislation/regulation/lawsuits/public opinion via whatever method is available, probably unions or other collective power.

2. Embrace the technology. Maybe build a voice model of yourself, sell the license affordably and broadly to those that want to take advantage of the convenience and scalability (as in number of phrases) of voice AI but don't want the mess of wading into unsettled legal territory. Or learn what voice AI is good at and what it is bad at and find your niche. Survive by being at the cutting edge of this new world, setting the standards and being knowledgable.

3. Walk away from an industry that is either dying or about to become unrecognizable.

The genie's not going back in the bottle.

Post reply on HN