Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ...
by klyrs on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @06:56AM
(#40426712)
> Also, remember that OpenAI isn't a single person, but a large organization with different people and viewpoints.
This falls flat since the CEO tweeted "her" when the version featuring her voice clone was released. The CEO was bragging about this feature; the company was aligned behind it until the blowback went public.
Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ...
by gwd on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @07:32AM
(#40426956)
I think you missed my point. Did Sam Altman personally think, a few days before the release, "Hmm, maybe I'd better call Scarlett again, just to be sure"? Or did someone else in the org propose that, to which Sam didn't object?
Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ...
by klyrs on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @07:36AM
(#40426988)
According to Johansson, Altman personally reached out to her. He didn't just "not object" here, he's the guy taking the actions. Nor is he a lackey who just does what he's told; he's the actual CEO. Unless you're saying OpenAI is a big organization with lots of Sam Altmen, I'm not sure that the point you're trying to make applies here.
https://www.npr.org/2024/05/20/1252495087/openai-pulls-ai-vo...
Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ...
by Y_Y on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @09:21AM
(#40428169)
> OpenAI is a big organization with lots of Sam Altmen
Hopefully you meant this as a joke, but this nightmare isn't so unrealistic! Put Sam's voice on top of gpt-5o and spin up fifty of them to start cold calling starlets, why not?
Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ...
by klyrs on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @07:30PM
(#40435518)
It's like a joke, but isn't funny.
Re:The OpenAI board was right – No (by a voice actres named ...
by MVissers on Tuesday May 21, 2024 @07:26AM
(#40426927)
Disney would sue them for that, no?
If it sounds too alike intentionally, it’s basically an impersonation of a character, which falls under copyright.
Someone else was sharing case law about this.
For one, because it's obviously better to have the exact voice rather than an imitation. For two, because it avoids exactly this kind of sticky situation: even if you believe you have a legal and moral right to do something, it's always nice to have the question completely air-tight.
Also, remember that OpenAI isn't a single person, but a large organization with different people and viewpoints. Not unlikely somebody in the organization foresaw the potential for this kind of reaction, knew they couldn't convince the right people to pull the voice completely, but thought they could maybe convince people to reach out again.
I mean, suppose they had a Darth Vader-y voice for some reason and had approached James Earl Jones to do it, and Jones had said no. Is it really so terrible to have someone else try to imitate the Darth Vader character? Jones, along with Lucas, made Darth Vader a cultural phenomenon; I don't think Jones should have the right to dictate forevermore all references to that phenomenon. The same goes for Scarlett Johansson and the author / director of 'Her'.