Row 43087

Row ID: 43087 | Dataset Entry | Axioma AXP Content Repository

Content Data

This page contains data entry 43087 from the Axioma AXP content repository. The structured data below represents the complete record for this entry.

She's not claiming they're using her work, she's claiming they're using her likeness. There is actually legal precedent for this situation. It's true that there are very few voices in this world that are so distinct you couldn't find a thousand same sounding voices per city, and scarjo is not one of those distinct voices. What matters is intent. If you ask a celebrity for permission to use their likeness, and they say no, you can't then hire an impersonator to do it instead. If they had hired this actress without ever contacting scarjo it would be a very different story. It would be delusional to claim that a similar sounding voice is stealing your likeness, and proving that in court would be impossible. But in this case they showed very clear intent to use her likeness, so instead it's delusional to try and claim that the similarities are purely coincidence. I'm not even saying they sound the same, but there is a vast variety of female vocal tones and dialects to choose from, and they landed this close to the person they wanted but couldn't have. It's like we're arguing about whether two shades of red are distinct enough to be fair use, when they had the entire color spectrum to choose from and still chose to go just a couple shades lighter than the one they were told not to use.

Also I haven't seen anyone discrediting the actress except the people claiming that she is being discredited. She did a job, she did it well, and I highly doubt her pay will be revoked based on the company's mistake. Very few people look up the real person behind their chat assistants, she will last much longer in peoples memories because of the controversy... Not that I've seen anyone saying "but the actress!" mention her name so far. Is that maybe because she was never credited to begin with? Hard to discredit someone you can't even be sure exists.

FieldValue
text She's not claiming they're using her work, she's claiming they're using her likeness. There is actually legal precedent for this situation. It's true that there are very few voices in this world that are so distinct you couldn't find a thousand same sounding voices per city, and scarjo is not one of those distinct voices. What matters is intent. If you ask a celebrity for permission to use their likeness, and they say no, you can't then hire an impersonator to do it instead. If they had hired th…
label r/chatgpt
dataType comment
communityName r/ChatGPT
datetime 2024-05-22
username_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak1OejE4a0dYQUZNYnloNG5IVktEZllkcHFWbWhRMVJucWJHVzBwdmhvOUp2eFR1dzVFTVN0eHA2cXdKTzQ5UFhsZEhnYW40UHo5S001QjlDcjdQRFJUTU9KeWVvQVpjZmZHUnA3V1h3UTJNZVk9
url_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak9kdEJUNUs3cHNkVzdoM2Mta0R0TGJuSE9BTmJPNU9tZ3FWd3VlaUxDUG1zV1hmZ0tCOG9hdmJwNlluN1JzTkRNbWlYak9YalVDQXlvMUx5Qm93U2xydmx3WkdTdGtmQjFpOXg3NF90SXU1MHc0akMzZTlzWDNHTGIzRHZEbzA0SzBKRnVoTmVfdHl3YXBJUFZadUVVN3VFZ3pvYkU3THBUTG1kNExwTy1rRm8wPQ==

Raw Record

{
  "text": "She's not claiming they're using her work, she's claiming they're using her likeness. There is actually legal precedent for this situation. It's true that there are very few voices in this world that are so distinct you couldn't find a thousand same sounding voices per city, and scarjo is not one of those distinct voices. What matters is intent. If you ask a celebrity for permission to use their likeness, and they say no, you can't then hire an impersonator to do it instead. If they had hired this actress without ever contacting scarjo it would be a very different story. It would be delusional to claim that a similar sounding voice is stealing your likeness, and proving that in court would be impossible. But in this case they showed very clear intent to use her likeness, so instead it's delusional to try and claim that the similarities are purely coincidence. I'm not even saying they sound the same, but there is a vast variety of female vocal tones and dialects to choose from, and they landed this close to the person they wanted but couldn't have. It's like we're arguing about whether two shades of red are distinct enough to be fair use, when they had the entire color spectrum to choose from and still chose to go just a couple shades lighter than the one they were told not to use. \n\nAlso I haven't seen anyone discrediting the actress except the people claiming that she is being discredited. She did a job, she did it well, and I highly doubt her pay will be revoked based on the company's mistake. Very few people look up the real person behind their chat assistants, she will last much longer in peoples memories because of the controversy... Not that I've seen anyone saying \"but the actress!\" mention her name so far. Is that maybe because she was never credited to begin with? Hard to discredit someone you can't even be sure exists.",
  "label": "r/chatgpt",
  "dataType": "comment",
  "communityName": "r/ChatGPT",
  "datetime": "2024-05-22",
  "username_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak1OejE4a0dYQUZNYnloNG5IVktEZllkcHFWbWhRMVJucWJHVzBwdmhvOUp2eFR1dzVFTVN0eHA2cXdKTzQ5UFhsZEhnYW40UHo5S001QjlDcjdQRFJUTU9KeWVvQVpjZmZHUnA3V1h3UTJNZVk9",
  "url_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak9kdEJUNUs3cHNkVzdoM2Mta0R0TGJuSE9BTmJPNU9tZ3FWd3VlaUxDUG1zV1hmZ0tCOG9hdmJwNlluN1JzTkRNbWlYak9YalVDQXlvMUx5Qm93U2xydmx3WkdTdGtmQjFpOXg3NF90SXU1MHc0akMzZTlzWDNHTGIzRHZEbzA0SzBKRnVoTmVfdHl3YXBJUFZadUVVN3VFZ3pvYkU3THBUTG1kNExwTy1rRm8wPQ=="
}
Explore Dataset Explore Row

Entry Information