Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#401

Post by GuB-42 »

nickthegreek wrote: post #114
crazygringo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, absolutely illegal. You don't need to copyright anything, you simply own the rights your own likeness -- your visual appearance and your voice. A company can't take a photo from your Facebook and plaster it across an advertisement for their product without you giving them the rights to do that. And if you're a known public figure, this includes lookalikes and soundalikes as well. You can't hire a ScarJo imperson…

If they didn’t use her actual voice for the training, didn’t hire voice talent to imitate her, didnt pursue her for a voice contract, didn’t make a reference to the movie in which she voices an AI, I feel OpenAI would have been on more stable legal footing. But they aren’t playing with a strong hand now and folded fast.

Not only that but they didn't credit the voice actress who sounds like her. If she was semi-famous and just naturally sounded like Scarlett Johansson, maybe they could have an argument: "it is not Scarlett, it is the famous [C-list actress] who worked in [production some people may know]".

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#402

Post by wkat4242 »

101008 wrote: post #394
wkat4242 wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> maybe not even a hiring of an impressionist If they really hired someone who sounds just like her it's fair game IMO. Johanssen can't own the right to a similar voice just like many people can have the same name. I think if there really was another actress and she just happens to sound like her, then it's really ok. And no I'm not a fan of Altman (especially his worldcoin which I view as a privacy disaster) I mean,…

But clearly they are advertising as her (no pun intended), which is a gray area.

Yeah that was the bad part. Agreed there.

I wonder if they deliberately steered towards this for more marketing buzz?

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#403

Post by sangnoir »

smt88 wrote: post #364
ncr100 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scar Jo thought it sounded like herself, and so did people who knew her personally. That is what matters. OWNERSHIP over her contributions to the world.

I mostly agree with you, but I actually don't think it matters if it sounded exactly like her or not. The crime is in the training: did they use her voice or not? If someone licenses an impersonator's voice and it gets very close to the real thing, that feels like an impossible situation for a court to settle and it should probably just be legal (if repugnant).

> The crime is in the training: did they use her voice or not?

This is a civil issue, and actors get broad rights to their likeliness. Kim Kardashian sued Old Navy for using a look-alike actress in an ad; old Navy chose to settle, which makes it appear like "the real actress wasn't involved in any way" may not be a perfect defense. The timeline makes it clear they wanted it to sound like Scarlett's voice, the actual mechanics on how they got the AI to sound like that is only part of the story.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#405

Post by steveBK123 »

sergiotapia wrote: post #335
steveBK123 wrote: post #37

Incredibly stupid The wink wink at creating an AI girlfriend is so bizarre I guess we know who their target user base is

[flagged]

better lonely mens money goes to big VC investor backed unicorns than solo founder/entrepreneurs?

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#408

Post by ecjhdnc2025 »

gibbitz wrote: post #379
ncallaway wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are we seriously saying we can't make voices that are similar to celebrities, when not using their actual voice? They clearly thought it was close enough that they asked for permission, twice. And got two no’s. Going forward with it at that point was super fucked up. It’s very bad to not ask permission when you should. It’s far worse to ask for permission and then ignore the response. Totally ethically bankrupt.

Are we surprised by this bankruptcy. As neat as AI is, it is only a thing because the corporate class see it as a way to reduce margins by replacing people with it. The whole concept is bankrupt.

100% this.

It’s shocking to me how people cannot see this.

The only surprise here is that they didn’t think she’d push back. That is what completes the multilayered cosmic and dramatic irony of this whole vignette. Honestly feels like Shakespeare or Arthur Miller might have written it.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#410

Post by 101008 »

option wrote: post #171
MBCook wrote: post #58

I really hope she sues the company to hell and back. She has the resources to fight back and make an example of them, and they have the resources to make it worthwhile.

[flagged]

it could make life better for a lot of people, but training their models on copyright material, which makes life worse for another set of people.
Post reply on HN