The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named Scarlet) means No

Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ... by throwawaymaths on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @05:37AM (#40426155)

What law is being broken here?

Suppose you turn down a job offer as a programmer. Can you be pissed at me if I offer the job to someone whose code looks like yours based on scraping GitHub?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ... by foolofat00k on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @06:02AM (#40426363)

I think this is the relevant case law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

Basically your voice is part of your likeness.

"Impersonation of a voice, or similarly distinctive feature, must be granted permission by the original artist for a public impersonation, even for copyrighted materials."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ... by LewisVerstappen on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @12:35PM (#40430652)

Quoting that as a relevant case law is completely ridiculous.

Did you even look at the Ford commercial? https://youtu.be/hxShNrpdVRs

Having someone sing in the exact same style as another singer is totally different from what OpenAI did with their voice AI (having a female actor speak in a flirty tone).

It makes sense with music but you're setting a really dangerous precedent if you can't even hire a voice actor who sounds similar for speaking.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ... by fireflash38 on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @06:57AM (#40426722)

You've shifted the goal posts.

[ Parent | on HN ]