Stefan Turkheimer: This might be a good take if the Lanham Act or, more generally, Copyright Law, and even more generally, the common law right to publicity didn't exist. But they do!

This might be a good take if the Lanham Act or, more generally, Copyright Law, and even more generally, the common law right to publicity didn't exist. But they do!

Remember when everyone was absolutely certain about the thing that totally happened and exemplified everything wrong with "AI culture" that ended up being...not what happened? www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2...

OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records showwww.washingtonpost.com A different actress was hired to voice OpenAI’s “Sky” months before CEO Sam Altman contacted Scarlett Johansson, according to documents and the actress’s agent.

I am unconvinced you know what any of those things are

Ok.

I should have noted that my comment wasn't really about your opinion but about the overall thought that because open ai hired someone prior to contacting scarjo that was somehow dispositive.

In just saying, you know that you can't copyright a voice and trademarks have nothing to do with this, right?

You can't copyright a voice, but that's not necessary to succeed here. right to publicity is definitely at play. I didn't mention trademark, but the concept that undergirds trademark and copyright law is unfairly making money off of someone's else's creative work, and that's present here.

But to use your voice example, Aflac trademarked Gilbert Gottfried's voice saying Aflac (as the duck). If an AI was used to mimic Gottfried's duck voice, in, say, a commercial for State Farm, what would the outcome be? It's just not as cut and dried as "you can't trademark a voice".

You didn't mention trademark? What, exactly, do you think the Lanham Act is?

Post