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

311–320 of 1001 posts

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

#311

Post by jagrsw »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #264
z7 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain the many people saying that the voices do not sound especially similar? "The pitch is kiiiiiind of close, but that's about it. Different cadence, different levels of vocal fry, slightly different accent if you pay close attention. Johansson drops Ts for Ds pretty frequently, Sky pronounces Ts pretty sharply. A linguist could probably break it down better than me and identify the different regions i…

Given the breadth and range of female voices available, this is way too close to be just a coincidence.

There are approximately 4 billion women in the world. Given that I know a few people who sound very similar to me, I would say that there are (subjectively) perhaps 1,000 to 10,000 different types of women's voices in the world.

This would mean that a celebrity could possess a voice similar to 0.5 million to 5 million other women, and potentially claim royalties if their voice is used.

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

#312

Post by codingdave »

moralestapia wrote: post #220
omnicognate wrote: post #171

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 l…

You misunderstand how personality rights work. Called it in the other thread and calling it in this one, there is no wrongdoing on OpenAI's side. Looking/sounding like somebody else (even if its famous) is not prosecutable. Scarlet Johansson has nothing in this case, whether people like it or not. That's the reality.

> whether people like it or not. That's the reality.

That is exactly it - people do not like how OpenAI is acting. Whether or not there is legal action to be had is an interesting tangent, but not the actual point - OpenAI's actions are ticking people off. Just because something is legal does not mean it is the right thing to do.

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

#313

Post by rjzzleep »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #228
gnicholas wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Midler case is readily distinguishable. From Wikipedia: > Ford Motor created an ad campaign for the Mercury Sable that specifically was meant to inspire nostalgic sentiments through the use of famous songs from the 1970s sung by their original artists. When the original artists refused to accept, impersonators were used to sing the original songs for the commercials. Midler was asked to sing a famous song of hers…

The actress did impersonate Her though. It's not just a random "voice for your chatbot", it's that particularly breathy, chatty, voice that she performed for the movie. I would agree with you completely if they'd created a completely different voice. Even if they'd impersonated a different famous actress. But it's the fact that Her was about an AI, and this is an AI, and the voices are identical. It's clearly an impe…

Can someone explain to me the outrage about mimicking a public persons voice, while half the people on hacker news argue that it's fine to steal open source code? I fail to see the logic here? Why is this more important?

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

#314

Post by itronitron »

czl wrote: post #245
gnicholas wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only similarity between the voice and Johansson’s is that it’s female, so by your logic half of California has a case. My understanding was that the voices sound quite similar. I haven't heard the original Sky voice so don't know. Are there any samples online?

Listen to the voices side by side: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1cwy6wz/vocal_comp... And here is voice of another actress ( Rashida Jones ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385414AVZcA If you click through and listen please reply and answer these questions: which actress do you think is similar to the openAI sky voice? And what does that tell you about likely court result for Johansson? And having reach…

Are you asking me to trust that a video clip posted to the ChatGPT subreddit by u/SWAMPMONK is providing an accurate audio recording of the openAI sky voice?

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

#315

Post by pyeri »

omnicognate wrote: post #171

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 l…

However strong her case may be but in lawsuits like these, the prosecution usually needs to prove *beyond reasonable doubt* that OpenAI copied her voice and that too intentionally. This, in all likelihood, seems very tough to come given the evidence so far. Yes, she might drag on the case for a long time but doubt that will cause the slightest dent in OpenAI's business.

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

#316

Post by sva_ »

OpenAI already won anyways. Either they'll pay a fine to Johansson or settle out of court.

But the media hype effect the demo was supposed to bring has already happened, so they don't really need the voice anymore.

The fine will be the cost of doing advertising/marketing, they absolutely knew what they were doing.

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

#317

Post by V__ »

pyeri wrote: post #315
omnicognate wrote: post #171

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 l…

However strong her case may be but in lawsuits like these, the prosecution usually needs to prove *beyond reasonable doubt* that OpenAI copied her voice and that too intentionally. This, in all likelihood, seems very tough to come given the evidence so far. Yes, she might drag on the case for a long time but doubt that will cause the slightest dent in OpenAI's business.

> Crimes must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas civil claims are proven by lower standards of proof, such as the preponderance of the evidence.

[1] https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-law-basics/the-dif...

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

#318

Post by huxley »

pyeri wrote: post #315
omnicognate wrote: post #171

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 l…

However strong her case may be but in lawsuits like these, the prosecution usually needs to prove *beyond reasonable doubt* that OpenAI copied her voice and that too intentionally. This, in all likelihood, seems very tough to come given the evidence so far. Yes, she might drag on the case for a long time but doubt that will cause the slightest dent in OpenAI's business.

This would be a civil not criminal case, there is no prosecution as well “beyond a reasonable doubt” is not the standard, rather Johansson’s lawyers only need to show that the balance of probabilities lies in her favour.

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

#319

Post by wavefunction »

Why don't I get to choose the voice I interact with. More and more it feels like "AI" is gonna be a 1%er gate-kept corporate curated "experience" with significant guard-rails and fences and walls and moats and signs telling me to keep off the grass.

The wealthy and powerful will again monopolize this power for their own benefit despite AI being the product of the sum of human technological civilization.

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

#320

Post by hotdogscout »

kunley wrote: post #231
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.

It's funny how uncritical protecting of mr Altman became a kind of religion for some, probably because such people might have certain hopes with his product, so they uncontrollably loose themselves in this view that everything he does needs to be cool & right. But no, he's a human making mistakes. A lot of mistakes, as it turns out

For me it is the blatant disregard for truth people on the internet usually have when dealing with public personalities.

I have the same instinct to criticize hate mobs against him as I have when they're against Anita Sarkeesian or Brianna Wu.

Post reply on HN