Row 79235

Row ID: 79235 | Dataset Entry | Axioma AXP Content Repository

Content Data

This page contains data entry 79235 from the Axioma AXP content repository. The structured data below represents the complete record for this entry.

Again. This is not a copyright or trademark issue. This is a likeness issue. Completely different. Having a kind of voice is an inherent property of a person, even the actress they ended up hiring. That is completely true. Everyone has the right to use their voices, and to make artistic works with them. People having similar voices is not the issue here.

The issue is intent and how they ended up with a voice model this similar to ScarJo.

They did saw value in having ScarJo's voice, both for its qualities and the connotations with the movie. This is made evident by (1) the team supposedly making their casting specifications and accepting the end result as we saw, even if it does not mention ScarJo; (2) them reaching out to her, and (3) Altman's tweet. Whether this whole thing happened because (a) they wanted SJ in the first place, or (b) they truly independently and unintentionally created a voice that they really liked and coincidentally it sounded like SJ, that can make some difference. Even if not much. But this still means they saw a possible legal issue arising from usage of this model, and would have liked to prevent it. They could not, and went ahead anyway. In the end, they did not secure the lawful use of SJ's likeness. They created a voice that made the impression on a significant amount of people, that it sounds like SJ.

Finally, lets notice that OpenAI does not use it now. This may mean that they themselves are not comfortable with their legal argumentation. Or it may also mean that the situation is already favorable for them:

1. They made an a-lister scared about losing their likeness. That is an impressive technological feat.

2. They made an ephemeral impression on some early adopters, and if they never let anyone use Sky again, everyone will be nostalgic about it. And others left out will next time immediately try anything OpenAI releases.

This whole thing is actually ingenious. But not in any way ethical, and possibly not legal.

FieldValue
text Again. This is not a copyright or trademark issue. This is a likeness issue. Completely different. Having a kind of voice is an inherent property of a person, even the actress they ended up hiring. That is completely true. Everyone has the right to use their voices, and to make artistic works with them. People having similar voices is not the issue here. The issue is intent and how they ended up with a voice model this similar to ScarJo. They did saw value in having ScarJo's voice, both for …
label r/chatgpt
dataType comment
communityName r/ChatGPT
datetime 2024-05-24
username_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak1rb3g5aXUyRjd3d1otTXMzUW1LZVg3am81ZEFQY0xXcnZiR3Fud0dZbUdvb3Z2N1Z1Vjd1NmpCekh5S0I4akR6YlJFYkNRSmp2bHdEYWdTSVFFUF9ELUE9PQ==
url_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak8xeEhPRkVuWXpGUWlrXzgyWjlDc0ZNOG9PcklwWlVVdWdzTUVoRFdITE5TLU9XcnlzYTJPa05jZUdybnJJNVc2dG5oTUluQlVJNE1MS21Iclo2SGx4UXR5RHoyZUFYZkZsRkpTWmhzckhNbDUycTRKUnR1Q3JQM1VLSnYtVlB6ako2blNXVzV2UU5USGd6S3JPUDRrSmt0aUZDemMtREVGczlndHF1Mm9ZSlNnPQ==

Raw Record

{
  "text": "Again. This is not a copyright or trademark issue. This is a likeness issue. Completely different.  \nHaving a kind of voice is an inherent property of a person, even the actress they ended up hiring. That is completely true. Everyone has the right to use their voices, and to make artistic works with them. People having similar voices is not the issue here.\n\nThe issue is intent and how they ended up with a voice model this similar to ScarJo.\n\nThey did saw value in having ScarJo's voice, both for its qualities and the connotations with the movie. This is made evident by (1) the team supposedly making their casting specifications and accepting the end result as we saw, even if it does not mention ScarJo; (2) them reaching out to her, and (3) Altman's tweet.   \n  \nWhether this whole thing happened because (a) they wanted SJ in the first place, or (b) they truly independently and unintentionally created a voice that they really liked and coincidentally it sounded like SJ, that can make some difference. Even if not much. But this still means they saw a possible legal issue arising from usage of this model, and would have liked to prevent it. They could not, and went ahead anyway.  \n  \nIn the end, they did not secure the lawful use of SJ's likeness.  \nThey created a voice that made the impression on a significant amount of people, that it sounds like SJ.\n\nFinally, lets notice that OpenAI does not use it now. This may mean that they themselves are not comfortable with their legal argumentation. Or it may also mean that the situation is already favorable for them: \n\n1. They made an a-lister scared about losing their likeness. That is an impressive technological feat.\n\n2. They made an ephemeral impression on some early adopters, and if they never let anyone use Sky again, everyone will be nostalgic about it. And others left out will next time immediately try anything OpenAI releases.\n\nThis whole thing is actually ingenious. But not in any way ethical, and possibly not legal.",
  "label": "r/chatgpt",
  "dataType": "comment",
  "communityName": "r/ChatGPT",
  "datetime": "2024-05-24",
  "username_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak1rb3g5aXUyRjd3d1otTXMzUW1LZVg3am81ZEFQY0xXcnZiR3Fud0dZbUdvb3Z2N1Z1Vjd1NmpCekh5S0I4akR6YlJFYkNRSmp2bHdEYWdTSVFFUF9ELUE9PQ==",
  "url_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak8xeEhPRkVuWXpGUWlrXzgyWjlDc0ZNOG9PcklwWlVVdWdzTUVoRFdITE5TLU9XcnlzYTJPa05jZUdybnJJNVc2dG5oTUluQlVJNE1MS21Iclo2SGx4UXR5RHoyZUFYZkZsRkpTWmhzckhNbDUycTRKUnR1Q3JQM1VLSnYtVlB6ako2blNXVzV2UU5USGd6S3JPUDRrSmt0aUZDemMtREVGczlndHF1Mm9ZSlNnPQ=="
}
Explore Dataset Explore Row

Entry Information