351–360 of 1001 posts
But if you deliberately seek out the actress who voiced "her" and then happen to get a similar sounding alternate after the "her" actress refuses, you're in legal violation. Is that right?
I'd like to have seen this go to court.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read the main article again. The voice actor was already auditioned and chosen before they went to Johansson. Maybe they had a change of plan and thought it would be cool to have Johansson's voice rather than an unknown actor's.
Not a lawyer, but wouldn't the important intent be the one when the voice is released, not the first moment someone gets hired? The economic harm happens when you publicize the voice in a way designed to gain value from Johannsen's reputation without her permission, not when you record it. The tweet and requests speak directly to that moment.
Voice is just an instrument. I love finding reasons to hate on big tech, but “it sounds like Me” (intentional or not) is bullshit. If I build a piano that sounds just like your piano… tough luck there are two pianos now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The actress did impersonate Her though. Did she? The article claims that: 1. Multiple people agree that the casting call mentioned nothing about SJ/her 2. The voice actress claims she was not given instructions to imitate SJ/her 3. The actress's natural voice sounds identical to the AI-generated Sky voice I don't personally think it's anywhere near "identical" to SJ's voice. It seems most likely to me that they not…
It sounds more like Rashida Jones than SJ to me. I think part of this PR cycle is also the priming effect, where if you're primed to hear something and then listen you do great it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
It is not about the voice. Rather using the fame of known actress to boost the product. If your inner motive is to sound like her because she is well-known, differences in voice does not matter much.
There's 1 billion English speakers, there are going to be voice overlaps.
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…
What sort of damages can Scarlett Johansson expect to get if OpenAI launches with the Sky voice for a short while, then pulls it quickly after the backlash (like they did)? Are punitive damages commonplace for such scenarios?
Bad PR is also PR.
Sosumi
Come on OpenAI - do it!
As an aside, I find it bewildering the hate for success that I see on this site. Ostensibly, the readers are either Startup founder adjacent who are dying for OpenAI's success, or Techie/intellectual types, which I assume aren't looking for monetary success and I would have thought would not be bothered by someone else going on a completely different path.
It’s not about hate for success. Well, maybe some of it is, but most is discourse about how several shady or questionable practices seem to be coming out of one company (OpenAI) or one person (Altman).
As an aside, I find it bewildering the hate for success that I see on this site. Ostensibly, the readers are either Startup founder adjacent who are dying for OpenAI's success, or Techie/intellectual types, which I assume aren't looking for monetary success and I would have thought would not be bothered by someone else going on a completely different path.
Some of us find the "great man" worship bewildering. You know, how we think the leaders of these companies are geniuses and have insightful things to say about everything.