Sam is a creep
Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
661–670 of 1001 posts
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#662Earlier quoted context omitted.
The voice was shipped last september.
Do you know if the voice was the same back in september?
The voices were available for some time for the ChatGPT TTS model, but it seems that they reused them for the 4o audio output, which sounds significantly more human-like. I’ve heard the Sky voice before and never made the connection. I did think of Johansson though during the live demo, as the voice + enhanced expressiveness made it sound much like the movie Her.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#663Earlier quoted context omitted.
Case law says no. There have been several legal cases where bands have sued advertisers for copying their distinct sound. Here are a few examples: The Beatles vs. Nike (1987): The Beatles' company, Apple Corps, sued Nike and Capitol Records for using the song "Revolution" in a commercial without their permission. The case was settled out of court. Tom Waits vs. Frito-Lay (1988): Tom Waits sued Frito-Lay for using a s…
Disregarding the cases settled out of court (which have nothing to do with case law): 1) Tom Waits vs Frito-Lay: Frito-Lay not only used a soundalike to Tom Waits, but the song they created was extremely reminiscent of "Step Right Up" by Waits. 2) Bette Midler vs. Ford Motor Company: Same thing - this time Ford literally had a very Midler-esque singer sing an exact Midler song. 3) Beastie Boys vs. Monster Energy: Mon…
And in an interesting coincidence: ScarJo recorded a Tom Waits cover album in 2008
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#664Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scarlet owns the voice of a stranger that happens to sound like her? That seems absurd. Just find someone who sounds like her, then hire them for the rights to their voice.
It’s really hard to assume in good faith that you are unfamiliar with the concept of impersonation. Just in case: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impersonator There is no doubt that the hired actor was an impersonator, this was explicitly stated by scama himself.
> There is no doubt that the hired actor was an impersonator, this was explicitly stated by scama himself.
And here's some caselaw where another major corporation got smacked down for doing the exact same thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
But given how unscrupulous Sam Altman appears to be, I wouldn't be surprised if OpenAI hired an impersonator as some kind half-ass legal cover, and went about using Johansson's voice anyway. Tech people do stupid shut sometimes because they assume they're so much cleverer than everyone else.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#665Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if the imitator is clearly an imitator? e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvF0l8RUGQ8
That's weird -- I would think Morgan Freeman would be able to sue over that, but I Am Not An Intellectual Property Lawyer.
I feel like that's a little different. In the cases of Midler, Waits, and Johansson, the companies involved wanted to use their voices, were turned down, and then went with an imitator to make it seem to the audience that the celebrity was actually performing. In the case of this "Morgan Freeman" video, Freeman himself is very obviously not performing: the imitator appears on screen, so it's explicitly acknowledged in the ad.
But I'm not a lawyer of any sort either, so... ::shrug::
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#666Well, that statement lays out a damning timeline: - OpenAI approached Scarlett last fall, and she refused. - Two days before the GPT-4o launch, they contacted her agent and asked that she reconsider. (Two days! This means they already had everything they needed to ship the product with Scarlett’s cloned voice.) - Not receiving a response, OpenAI demos the product anyway, with Sam tweeting “her” in reference to Scarle…
This statement from scarlet really changed my perspective. I use and loved the Sky voice and I did feel it sounded a little like her, but moreover it was the best of their voice offerings. I was mad when they removed it. But now I’m mad it was ever there to begin with. This timeline makes it clear that this wasn’t a coincidence and maybe not even a hiring of an impressionist (which is where things get a little more w…
Everyone is so mad about them stealing a beloved celebrity’s voice. What about the millions of authors and other creators whose copyrighted works they stole to create works that resemble and replace those people? Not famous enough to generate the same outrage?
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#667Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing about the situation is that Altman is willing to lie and steal a celebrity's voice for use in ChatGPT. What he did, the timeline, everything - is sleazy if, in fact, that's the story. The really concerning part here is that Altman is, and wants to be, a large part of AI regulation [0]. Quite the public contradiction. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-openai-artificial...
Most likely it was an unforced error, as there’ve been a lot of chaos with cofounders and the board revolt, easy to loose track of something really minor. Like some intern’s idea to train the voice on their favorite movie. And then they’ve decided that this is acceptable risk/reward and not a big liability, so worth it. This could be a well-planned opening move of a regulation gambit. But unlikely.
> Like some intern’s idea to train the voice on their favorite movie.
Ah, the famous rogue engineer.
The thing is, even if it were the case, this intern would have been supervised by someone, who themselves would have been managed by someone, all the way to the top. The moment Altman makes a demo using it, he owns the problem. Such a public fuckup is embarrassing.
> And then they’ve decided that this is acceptable risk/reward and not a big liability, so worth it.
You mean, they were reckless and tried to wing it? Yes, that’s exactly what’s wrong with them.
> This could be a well-planned opening move of a regulation gambit. But unlikely.
LOL. ROFL, even. This was a gambit all right. They just expected her to cave and not ask questions. Altman has a common thing with Musk: he does not play 3D chess.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#668Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not precisely copyright, but most states recognize some form of personality rights, which encompass a person's voice just as much as the person's name or visual appearance.
But where it will get murky is people sound like other people. Most voices are hardly unique. It will be interesting to see where this lands.
> But where it will get murky is people sound like other people. Most voices are hardly unique. It will be interesting to see where this lands.
Yes, it will be interesting in June 1988 when we will find out "where this lands": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#669Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always mix up those two in my head and have to think which one is which
One is in jail, when it should be two are in jail
I dont like sam, but he moves way smarter than ppl like sbf or Elizabeth holmes. He actual has a product close to the reported specs, albeit still far away from the ultimate goal of AGI
i dont see why he should be in jail
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#670Earlier quoted context omitted.
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).
If OpenAI commissioned a voice actor to lend their voice to the Sky model, and cast on the basis of trying to get someone who is similar sounding to the Scarlett Johannson, but then did not advertise or otherwise use the voice model created to claim it was Scarlett Johannson - then they're completely in the clear. Because then the actual case would be fairly bizarre: an entirely separate person, selling the rights to…
Well Sam Altman tweeted "her" so that does seem to me like they're trying to claim a similarity to Scarlett Johannson.