The conundrum of sound likes

bobcat

bobcat

Well-known Member
Location
Northern Calif
This seems to be a confusing issue that not all jurisdictions agree on. Some courts have ruled that a voice cannot be copyrighted, but a recorded work can. However, not all courts agree on that ruling. Some say that a person's voice is as distinct as their face and therefore, without consent, it is stealing their identity, assuming it is done with the intent to deceive. But even that has a wrinkle, because if it is your normal voice, then you aren't stealing anything.

Now with the rise of AI, if you want to give your humanoid robot a voice that sounds just like Morgan Freeman, and it is now the robots normal voice, then is it Illegal. Also, there are many Elvis impersonators that try to sound just like him, and I doubt all have gotten permission to do that.

I understand that it is currently possible for an AI to listen to a voice for a few seconds and be able to replicate it. So, I am left wondering if an AI generates a voice just like that of a famous singer, and creates a new original song that sounds just like that artist, will the AI or the person owning it get sued, and would it stand up in court?
 

Naturally said:
If they come up with Bob Dylan singing Silent Night ... I'm suing
Click to expand...
Ha ha. Yes, in a case like that, Silent Night is a created work, and as such, it's copyrighted.
This is about the sound of a person's voice being duplicated.

Darrell Hammond from Saturday Night live, or others like Rich Little, from years ago, were great at sound alike impersonations, but as far as I know, no celebrity ever threw a fit over it. I think it was just considered flattery. However, when money is involved, it can quickly change, and the issue can get a little sticky, apparently due to intent.
 

The qualities of a voice can be calculated mathematically. I don't think anyone is sued for sounding like someone else, it's in the specific use it's used for. So, you can make a video using the voice characteristics of Sylvester Stallone without trouble. However, you use that voice to endorse a product for sale, you'll fall foul of the law.
 
VaughanJB said:
The qualities of a voice can be calculated mathematically. I don't think anyone is sued for sounding like someone else, it's in the specific use it's used for. So, you can make a video using the voice characteristics of Sylvester Stallone without trouble. However, you use that voice to endorse a product for sale, you'll fall foul of the law.
Click to expand...
Well that's kinda what I thought, but in the case of Bette Midler vs Ford Motor co, it was a bit different. Ford tried to get Midler to sing the song, but she refused, so Ford got permission from the copyright holder and hired a sound alike singer. She sued and lost because the sound of a person's voice cannot be copyrighted. But then she appealed and won. She wasn't seeking damages from how it was used (For profit), but that the sound of her voice was unique and a protected right. This time she won, but I think it was because the sound alike was using one of her songs (Even though they had permission), and intended to make it sound like it was actually her singing.

The appellate court ruled that the voice of someone famous as a singer is distinctive to their person and image and therefore, as a part of their identity, it is unlawful to imitate their voice without express consent and approval. The appellate court reversed the district courts decision and ruled in favor of Midler, indicating her voice was protected against unauthorized use.

Apparently it's a very fine line.
 
Me: Can the voice of anyone famous be copied by AI and then used for something else? Is that legal?

Pi : This is a fascinating and somewhat controversial topic in the realm of AI. While it is technically possible for AI to replicate the voice of a famous person, the legalities surrounding this practice can be complex.
Currently, there are no specific laws that directly address the use of AI-generated celebrity voices. However, issues such as copyright infringement, right of publicity, and potential misrepresentation could arise depending on how the AI-generated voice is used.
For example, if the AI-generated voice is used in a commercial context without permission from the celebrity, this could potentially be considered a violation of their right of publicity. Similarly, if the AI-generated voice is used to spread misinformation or defame the celebrity, this could lead to legal issues.
Overall, while AI-generated celebrity voices are technically feasible, navigating the legal landscape surrounding their use requires careful consideration and understanding of existing laws and potential risks. 🎙️⚖️

The estate of actor and comedian Robin Williams restricted the use of his voice for AI purposes until 2039, potentially to avoid legal issues and protect his legacy.
 
This may be dumb, but I've often wondered if we all sound the same. A cat goes, "meow"- you know it's a cat. A dog goes, "woof"- you know it's a dog. You know what a chimp, a horse, a cow sound like, so while we can differentiate several human voices, to other animals, do we all sound like "humans"??? If you were an animal in the forest, and you heard some calls, would you think, "oh yeah, that's a human?"
 
Paco Dennis said:
Me: Can the voice of anyone famous be copied by AI and then used for something else? Is that legal?

Pi : This is a fascinating and somewhat controversial topic in the realm of AI. While it is technically possible for AI to replicate the voice of a famous person, the legalities surrounding this practice can be complex.
Currently, there are no specific laws that directly address the use of AI-generated celebrity voices. However, issues such as copyright infringement, right of publicity, and potential misrepresentation could arise depending on how the AI-generated voice is used.
For example, if the AI-generated voice is used in a commercial context without permission from the celebrity, this could potentially be considered a violation of their right of publicity. Similarly, if the AI-generated voice is used to spread misinformation or defame the celebrity, this could lead to legal issues.
Overall, while AI-generated celebrity voices are technically feasible, navigating the legal landscape surrounding their use requires careful consideration and understanding of existing laws and potential risks. 🎙️⚖️

The estate of actor and comedian Robin Williams restricted the use of his voice for AI purposes until 2039, potentially to avoid legal issues and protect his legacy.
Click to expand...
It seems to be wading into uncharted territory with AI. In the case of Bette Midler (Cited above), Ford had permission to use the copyrighted work from the holder of it, including using the song for a commercial. However, Midler claimed that using the sound of her voice should be a protected right exclusive to her. She lost in the lower court, but won in the appellate court. So apparently using the copyrighted song wasn't the issue, it was impersonating her voice singing her song that was.

I think it was the intent that caused the reversal. If they had a sound alike singer to sing a random song that they also had permission to do, and it sounded remarkably just like Bette Midler singing it, then the ruling may have gone another way, but in this case, they wanted the listeners to believe it was her. I don't know, just guessing.
 
PeppermintPatty said:
Thats right. You ‘usually’ CAN copy another artists work, you just can’t sell it or use it as your own.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, until recently the sound of a person's voice was not something that could be copyrighted, but that may be changing. However, what if your voice naturally sounds remarkably like a celebrity singer, and your new song becomes a hit, what then? Also, what if it's an AI that sounds exactly like the celebrity?
 
This just in from my news feed...

GPTs that impersonate people without consent are also forbidden, but chatbots are impersonating political candidates and public figures, like Elon Musk and Taylor Swift.
 
Paco Dennis said:
This just in from my news feed...

GPTs that impersonate people without consent are also forbidden, but chatbots are impersonating political candidates and public figures, like Elon Musk and Taylor Swift.
Click to expand...
From what I understand, there are no less than 17 different AI software platforms in the mix and growing. I suppose there will have to be court cases to establish an AI Bill Of Rights and governing laws that set a precedent, to say nothing of ethics that are in the gray area. It could be a rather sticky mess till it gets fleshed out. Meanwhile, I suspect it may be somewhat of a wild west by people engaging in all manner of wild and crazy behavior.
 
bobcat said:
Good question. It used to be considered flattery, but it may turn into a risky business in the future, especially with deep fakes and AI.
Click to expand...
There's these scam-busters who post youtube videos of them wasting scammer's time (that would otherwise be used to scam people) by flooding their call centers with AI-generated messages with celebrity voices, i.e., Arnold Schwarzenegger repeating "I'll be back" or yelling "It's not a tumor!"

Sometimes the scam-busters run a stream of iconic quotes from famous movies in the celebrity voices that actually fit the scammer's script, so Schwarzenegger, for example, can carry on a fairly reasonable conversation with a scammer.

The videos are funny as hell, but the main purpose is to keep the scammer on the line. Meanwhile, some scam-busters steal the scammers's computer files and then deploy a virus to corrupt the entire call center's system.
(they've found a way to access their comp systems)
 
Murrmurr said:
There's these scam-busters who post youtube videos of them wasting scammer's time (that would otherwise be used to scam people) by flooding their call centers with AI-generated messages with celebrity voices, i.e., Arnold Schwarzenegger repeating "I'll be back" or yelling "It's not a tumor!"

Sometimes the scam-busters run a stream of iconic quotes from famous movies in the celebrity voices that actually fit the scammer's script, so Schwarzenegger, for example, can carry on a fairly reasonable conversation with a scammer.

The videos are funny as hell, but the main purpose is to keep the scammer on the line. Meanwhile, some scam-busters steal the scammers's computer files and then deploy a virus to corrupt the entire call center's system.
(they've found a way to access their comp systems)
Click to expand...
Wow, a nightmare AI style. The scam-busters may want to be careful though. I was reading a law article that says, in the mind melting, horribly long "terms of use" agreement that no one reads when using the AI platform, it states in Section 7a of the Open AI agreement that the user is responsible for any and all legal costs from any lawsuits from unlawful use. Even using a small iconic phrase from a celebrity can be considered copyrighted, especially when using the celebrity's voice. I don't know, but I think with the rise of AI and vast possibilities, this may get ugly.
 
I read somewhere that the plan is to have AI scan all the posts/pictures/videos and it will find the illegal uses. The plethora of material in the cloud is massive. Alerting the platform and not allowing posts is what they will try to do. I wonder how that is gonna work out? :eek:
 
Paco Dennis said:
I read somewhere that the plan is to have AI scan all the posts/pictures/videos and it will find the illegal uses. The plethora of material in the cloud is massive. Alerting the platform and not allowing posts is what they will try to do. I wonder how that is gonna work out? :eek:
Click to expand...
It's beyond my guess, but one thing I will say is AI is going to be a game changer in the next few years. It's gonna be like a prolonged earthquake shaking up everything from healthcare, media content, investing, science, and more. Buckle up everyone.
 
In "Homie the Clown," Homer enrolls in Krusty's clown college and becomes a certified Krusty impersonator. So what would be the ruling if AI impersonated Dan Castellaneta voicing Homer impersonating Krusty the Clown (who is voiced by Dan Castellaneta)?
 
OldEngineer said:
In "Homie the Clown," Homer enrolls in Krusty's clown college and becomes a certified Krusty impersonator. So what would be the ruling if AI impersonated Dan Castellaneta voicing Homer impersonating Krusty the Clown (who is voiced by Dan Castellaneta)?
Click to expand...
Probably past my pay grade, but I would assume each one is a created work, and each one has permission to use the copyrighted material of the previous work. If that's true, then no harm, no foul. If not, then the previous copyright owner could sue.
 
bobcat said:
Wow, a nightmare AI style. The scam-busters may want to be careful though. I was reading a law article that says, in the mind melting, horribly long "terms of use" agreement that no one reads when using the AI platform, it states in Section 7a of the Open AI agreement that the user is responsible for any and all legal costs from any lawsuits from unlawful use. Even using a small iconic phrase from a celebrity can be considered copyrighted, especially when using the celebrity's voice. I don't know, but I think with the rise of AI and vast possibilities, this may get ugly.
Click to expand...
On the movie quotes programs, you choose from a list of various actor's quotes from various movies. I'd wager the program creator or publisher got someone's permission and maybe even paid for the use of the actor's voices, if it's required.

There's several of these programs out there. They aren't free; you buy them at a tech shop or download them online with a credit card.

I assume the quotes themselves are public domain. You see them all over the place...memes and movie reviews, for example.
 
I'm sure with the evolution of AI in the use of recordings it will demand new laws be put in place to protect human artists' rights. I wouldn't be surprised if those laws also keep evolving to encompass new situations that arise.
 
Last edited:
Paco Dennis said:
This just in from my news feed...

GPTs that impersonate people without consent are also forbidden, but chatbots are impersonating political candidates and public figures, like Elon Musk and Taylor Swift.
Click to expand...
A video of the speech given by a South American president at a recent international conference was not only translated to English, his mouth was manipulated by AI to appear as though he was actually speaking English.

When we watched that, my wife and I looked at each other like "Uh-oh." Because, what a beautiful way to spread misinformation.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top