You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
56 points

A big lawsuit is necessary to set a precedence.

permalink
report
reply
-54 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Wtf are you talking about

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Not what you or the Supreme Court thinks.

Phew, good thing the courts in the USA - (a country with sadly laughable protections for people’s rights compared to other large developed regions like the EU) - are the only courts in the world, and what they do is the only thing that matters.

Thanks for telling us all what we think, by the way. Where would we be without an American telling us all what we think?

We’re so lucky.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Are you telling me they’re going to assassinate Scarlett Johansson

permalink
report
parent
reply
-58 points

This article is bullshit man, voice is not even that similar, there is 0 proof that’s her voice or even that they asked her if they can use her voice. People is blowing this out of proportion

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

But they did ask if they could license her voice and she said no. Balls in your court.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points
*

Guy you replied to did miss that part but consider the (still to be verified) facts.

  • they ask to use her voice, she declined.

  • they proceed by not using her voice. Someone else’s voice instead.

oPeNaI “believe that AI voices should not deliberately mimic a celebrity’s distinctive voice—Sky’s voice is not an imitation of Scarlett Johansson but belongs to a different professional actress using her own natural speaking voice. To protect their privacy, we cannot share the names of our voice talents.”

The end result is pretty clear here. Either this other person exist and could testify privately in court with her natural voice which she has the rights to work with OpenAi. There is a closure in law where not being able to provide evidence that the court knows must exist can make you guilty. Openai could have tried to pull a “this is a fully unique synthetic voice” but crucially they did not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points
*

And they didn’t use her voice. Article clearly states that she said she is shocked they choose similar voice to her after she declined. It makes sense for open Ai to choose similar one because when they were preparing list of the voices they obviously wanted voice to be of her kind. It’s not like her voice is something so fucking unique she has copyright over all of the similar voices in the world

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 553K

    Comments