how is this here. tabloid smut
Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
281–290 of 487 posts
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've really contorted the facts here. This isn't a character, it's a voice. The voice sounds remarkably like Scarlett Johansson's.
It’s the other way around. The contortionists are on the other side of the issue. We’re talking about OpenAI hiring someone to use their natural speaking voice . As movies say, any similarity to existing people is completely coincidental from a legal perspective. From a moral perspective, I can’t believe that people are trying to argue that someone’s voice should be protected under law. But that’s a personal opinion.
> We’re talking about OpenAI hiring someone to use their natural speaking voice.
How do you know?
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#283There are many people with voices similar to Scarlett Johansson's. If SJ is unwilling to be a voice actor for OpenAi, then why should OpenAI not find a similar voice and use that instead? SJ certainly does not have a monopoly on all voices similar to hers. Anyone in possession of such a voice has the same right as SJ to monetize it. And someone did in fact exercise that right. If you compare the Sky voice to SJ's, th…
If they told the voice actor to try to impersonate SJ, then Scarlett does have a case.
That may not be how it should work, but it is very much how the law currently works.
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#284Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are saying that YIMBYs "really want to build in your backyard, not their own" which is nonsense.
Some of them do, or they're only YIMBY until they own something
I 'own something' and advocated for some apartments right down the street from me.
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
A potential answer to that is liability protection even when you feel like you are legally in the clear. It is still worth paying a sum to avoid a lawsuit you think you will win. An example of this is Weird Al pays for the rights to things that are probably ok under fair use parody protection. Paying for the rights removes the possibily of a challenge.
Does Weird Al pay rights? I know he asks for permission to maintain his relationships with artists and to make sure he gets his share of songwriting credits (and the fees). But does he pay for rights? I’ve never seen that before and I’d love to read more.
Actually, yes, he does.
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
While not defending OpenAI or Altman, the caveat here is that this was a voice actor using their natural voice, not an actor impersonating scarlett johansson. Setting a precedent that if your natural voice sounds similar to a more famous actor precludes you from work would be a terrible precedent to set.
I think it would be more like "precludes you from work (arguably) deceptively impersonating the more famous actor."
Speaking with your natural voice is not impersonating.
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it would be more like "precludes you from work (arguably) deceptively impersonating the more famous actor."
Speaking with your natural voice is not impersonating.
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#289This is a typical "move fast and break things" mentality.. except that mentality betrays Sam's statements about doing a bunch of this stuff "carefully" etc.. its all a smokescreen.. nobody is going to realistically stop working on AGI in order to be careful.. basically AGI is being pursued like the race to get the atom bomb.. so yea history tells us its full speed ahead with no brakes. Scarjo is just the latest perso…
I would put this in the "better to ask for forgiveness than ask than permission" bucket. Which is also a typical mentality in SV.
Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is
#290Altman would have us believe it's all just an innocent misunderstanding but without actually saying so: "We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any outreach to Ms. Johansson." Is he trying to suggest the company did not try to make the voice sound like her without her permission? The statement sounds like it's written by a lawyer to be technically true while implying something that is actually false. These…
There are hundreds of people with similar voices. If any voice actor can pull the same accent than Ms. Johansson, it should be fair game, as long it was the original training material? Voices cannot be copyrighted or be exclusive, although I am sure Hollywood will try to copyright them in some point.
[deleted]