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

411–420 of 1001 posts

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

#411

Post by foobar_______ »

pseudosavant wrote: post #176
justeoghan wrote: post #163

I never comment on HN I’ve just always been a long time lurker but I feel like I’m going crazy here reading comments. SJ is not the “AI” portrayed in the movie her. And AFAIK she does not in fact have all the same idiosyncrasies and tones in real life as the voice does in the movie because she was in fact directed to act like that. Not only that but the voices are not the same because there was another actress for sk…

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.

Exactly. I barely know who this actress is. To me, it sounds like the tens of thousands of other white american voices. How is the remotely too similar?

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

#412

Post by latexr »

cthalupa wrote: post #406
naasking wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So its: ask Johansson, get declined, ask casting directors for the type of voice actors they are interested in, listened to 400 voices, choose one that sounds like the actor Except it doesn't sound like Johansson, I don't know why people keep saying this. At best, the voice has a couple of similar characteristics, but I didn't think for one second that it was her. Can James Earl Jones sue if someone uses a voice ac…

I've been saying this for days, and I'm pretty firmly in the OpenAI critic camp. The only reason people think it sounds like her is because they've biased themselves into it because of all the context surrounding it.

> they've biased themselves into it

Maybe the fault for that belongs to the company who tried to create the association in your mind by using a similar voice and tweeting about that one movie with the voice.

That’s basic advertising. They knew what they were doing. It’s just that it may have backfired.

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

#413

Post by rootlocus »

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…

> indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use

But it wasn't her voice, it was the voice of the impersonator. By that logic, the impersonator can never speak without authorization because the impersonator would use Bette Midler's voice.

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

#415

Post by josefx »

dghughes wrote: post #367
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…

Wouldn't that apply to entertainers like Rich Little whose entire career was him doing his best to exactly impersonate famous peoples' voices and mannerisms?

Parody tends to fall into various exemptions. Of course one might argue that OpenAIs work itself is a parody of AGI.

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

#416

Post by ljf »

rootlocus wrote: post #413
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…

> indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use But it wasn't her voice, it was the voice of the impersonator. By that logic, the impersonator can never speak without authorization because the impersonator would use Bette Midler's voice.

They wanted people to either think that is was Bette Midler, or someone that sounded very like her to gain the benefit of association with her. They wanted to use some of Bette's cultural cachet, without her permission.

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

#417

Post by preommr »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #274
throwaway115 wrote: post #133

This whole thing is starting to feel like another Sam Altman spotlight production. There's enough evidence to show no wrongdoing, but it was handled in a way to make people think there was a scandal. Maximum spotlight for relatively low risk. I wonder if people will get tired of being jerked around like this.

> for relatively low risk This was rocket fuel for activists trying to get a nationwide personality rights law on the books. That would almost certainly increase costs for OpenAI.

> That would almost certainly increase costs for OpenAI.

And every one of it's competitors. I think regulatory capture would be just as much, if not more, of a victory for OpenAI.

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

#418

Post by bko »

baxtr wrote: post #296
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…

The sad thing is: most probably absolutely nothing will happen. These startups break laws, pay the fines and end up just fine. Remember that it was Sam Altman who proposed to change the YC questionnaire to screen applicants by incidents where they have successfully broken rules. YC even boasts about that.

Do we really want someone's voice to be copyrightable, to a point where similar sounding people can't be used?

This is such a weird issue for HN to be upset about when other IP related issues (e.g. companies suing for recreating generic code, patent trolls, trademark colors, disregard of paywall, reverse engineering, etc), people here overwhelmingly fall on the side of weaker IP protections.

I guess the diff is some people just pick the side of "the little guy" and the example of centi millionaire beautiful actress vs billion dollar founder, the scales tip to the actress

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

#419

Post by brvsft »

weinzierl wrote: post #333
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…

There are probably a number of other cases. The one I remember is when Sega asked Lady Miss Kier of Deee-Lite fame to use her public image for a game. Nothing come out of it but Sega made the character Ulala [1] anyway. If you grew up in the 90s the characters name was strongly connected to Lady Miss Kier's catch phrase, but unfortunately she lost the suit and had to pay more than half a million. [1] https://en.m.wik…

> Lady Miss Kier's catch phrase

Not to over-analyze your use of language, but using the possessive here makes it seem like she personally owned that phrase or its use was associated with her. First, I don't know if that's true. Did she say, "Ooh la la," constantly, or is it just something she said at the beginning of the music video (and possibly studio recording) of the one hit from Deee-Lite, Groove Is In The Heart? Moreover, that phrase is a fairly well-known and widely-used one, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ooh_La_La. It certainly was not original to her nor would its use indicate an association to her. To your point, its use plus the aesthetic of the character does seem like a reference to Lady Miss Kier's appearance in that music video (if not also her style and appearance more generally, I don't know if that is how she always looks). But she didn't sue everyone else on this list for the use of her supposed catch phrase, ooh la la.

I hate to say one person's fame is so great that they get special or different treatment in court, but I think "Lady Miss Kier" was punching above her weight in trying to sue over use of her image. Her fame was a flash-in-the-pan one-hit-wonder in the early 90s, no offense to any Deee-Lite fans. It was certainly a great song (with some help from Herbie Hancock, Bootsy Collins, and Q-Tip).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etviGf1uWlg

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

#420

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

baxtr wrote: post #296
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…

The sad thing is: most probably absolutely nothing will happen. These startups break laws, pay the fines and end up just fine. Remember that it was Sam Altman who proposed to change the YC questionnaire to screen applicants by incidents where they have successfully broken rules. YC even boasts about that.

They're likely going to write Scarlett Johansson a large check and get a new voice.

What else do you think is going to happen?

The entire company gets shut down?

Post reply on HN