Breaking down Scarlett Johansson's dispute with OpenAI
Summary
TLDR在这段视频中,讨论了人工智能(AI)在创意产业中的应用及其引发的法律问题。视频以一个AI生成的声音克隆开始,这个声音克隆听起来与斯嘉丽·约翰逊的声音非常相似。斯嘉丽·约翰逊对此表示担忧,并要求停止使用她的声音。OpenAI公司最近推出了其最新的AI模型GPT 40,并展示了一个名为Sky的音频互动角色,这个角色的声音听起来与斯嘉丽·约翰逊在电影《她》中为一个人工智能虚拟助手配音的声音非常相似。斯嘉丽·约翰逊声称,尽管她拒绝提供自己的声音,OpenAI还是在未经她同意的情况下开发了这个声音。然而,OpenAI否认了这一点。视频还讨论了AI在创意产业中的作用,包括作家和演员对AI可能取代他们工作的担忧。知识产权律师Joseph Lawler解释了与名人声音相关的法律问题,包括公开权和虚假代言理论。他指出,名人的声音可能受到法律保护,而普通人的声音可能不具备同样的保护。最后,Lawler讨论了如果一个人的声音被广泛授权使用,这可能会如何影响其声音的商业价值。
Takeaways
- 🎙️ 视频开头使用了声音克隆技术,展示了人工智能生成的音频片段。
- 🎬 斯嘉丽·约翰逊要求OpenAI停止使用未经她授权的声音克隆。
- 🤖 OpenAI最近发布了最新的人工智能模型GPT 40,并展示了名为Sky的交互式虚拟助手。
- 🚫 约翰逊声称OpenAI未经她同意就开发了她的声音克隆,而OpenAI否认了这一点。
- 🎥 斯嘉丽·约翰逊的声音克隆与她在电影《她》中的人工智能虚拟助手的声音相似。
- 📚 AI在创意产业中可以成为强大的工具,帮助创作者,但同时也引发了关于AI使用权的争议。
- 🔍 内容创作者担心AI技术的学习过程,即AI的训练,可能侵犯了他们的内容版权。
- 📖 包括《纽约时报》在内的一些内容创作者正在起诉OpenAI,认为AI工具在训练过程中不当使用了他们的内容。
- 👩⚖️ 法律专家Joseph Lawler讨论了声音克隆的法律问题,包括公众形象权和虚假代言理论。
- 👥 确定声音克隆是否侵犯了个人权利,可能需要法官或陪审团的主观判断。
- 🌐 如果个人的声音被广泛授权使用,可能会改变其声音的独特价值和商业潜力。
Q & A
什么是声音克隆,它如何工作?
-声音克隆是一种人工智能技术,它能够模仿特定人的声音。通过分析某人的语音样本,AI可以学习并复制其独特的语音特征,包括语调、节奏和口音,从而生成听起来非常相似的音频。
Scarlett Johansson 为什么希望 OpenAI 停止使用她的声音克隆?
-Scarlett Johansson 认为 OpenAI 在未经她许可的情况下使用了她的声音克隆,这可能侵犯了她的个人权利。她在电影《她》中为一个人工智能虚拟助手配音,而 OpenAI 的声音克隆听起来与她在电影中的声音非常相似。
OpenAI 的最新 AI 模型 GPT-40 有哪些特点?
-GPT-40 是 OpenAI 最新的人工智能模型,它具有音频交互功能。该模型包括一个名为 Sky 的交互式角色,能够进行对话,模拟人类交流。
内容创作者如何使用 AI 技术?
-内容创作者可以使用 AI 作为辅助工具来提高创作效率。例如,在编剧罢工期间,编剧们争取到了确保他们编写剧本的权利,并可以使用 AI 作为辅助工具,但制片厂老板不能使用 AI 替代人类编剧。
AI 训练过程中的法律问题是什么?
-AI 训练需要大量数据,这可能涉及到使用受版权保护的内容。一些内容创作者,包括《纽约时报》,正在起诉 OpenAI,认为 AI 工具在训练过程中不当使用了他们创作和拥有的内容。
Scarlett Johansson 如何可能通过法律手段保护自己的声音权利?
-Scarlett Johansson 可以通过两种法律理论来保护自己的声音权利:一是公开权法,它保护个人的名字、形象、肖像以及声音;二是虚假代言理论,即使用听起来像她的声音可能会误导消费者认为她实际上在为产品背书。
如果一个非名人的声音被广泛使用,他们的声音权利会受到哪些影响?
-如果一个非名人的声音被广泛使用,他们的声音可能不再具有独特性或商业价值。公开权法保护个人对其声音或形象的商业利用权,如果声音被广泛授权使用,那么这个声音的独家价值可能会降低。
如何确定一个声音克隆是否足够接近原声?
-这通常需要法律专家和可能的法庭程序来确定。法官会初步判断声音克隆是否足够相似以至于通过初步测试,而最终可能需要陪审团来决定是否构成侵权。
OpenAI 为什么可能不希望公开在法庭上与 Scarlett Johansson 进行法律斗争?
-OpenAI 作为一个受到广泛关注的公司,任何法律斗争都可能对其公众形象产生影响。为了避免公众关系问题,他们可能更倾向于私下解决与 Scarlett Johansson 的争议。
如果一个人的声音被授权给其他人使用,那么这个人对声音的权利会发生什么变化?
-如果一个人的声音被授权广泛使用,那么这个人对声音的独家权利将会受限。授权的范围将决定他们未来对声音使用权的控制程度。
为什么个人应该拥有对其声音或形象的商业利用权?
-公开权法认为个人应该有权决定如何商业化利用自己的声音或形象。这是为了保护个人的利益,防止未经授权的使用可能导致的经济损失或形象损害。
在 AI 技术发展迅速的今天,内容创作者应如何保护自己的权益?
-内容创作者应该了解并行使他们的法律权利,例如公开权法和版权法,以保护自己的作品不被未经授权的使用。同时,他们也应该关注行业动态,参与相关的行业协会,以便更好地维护自己的利益。
Outlines
😀 人工智能与声音克隆的争议
视频脚本讨论了人工智能生成的声音克隆问题,特别是围绕女演员斯嘉丽·约翰逊的声音克隆争议。约翰逊声称,OpenAI公司未经她许可,使用她的声音制作了一个AI版本的声音,这与她在电影《她》中的配音相似。OpenAI否认了这一点,并展示了他们的AI模型GPT 40以及与该模型交互的虚拟助手Sky。视频还提到了AI在创意产业中的应用,以及内容创作者对于AI训练数据的担忧,包括《纽约时报》对OpenAI的诉讼。此外,讨论了声音克隆在法律上可能涉及的权利,如公众形象权和虚假代言问题,以及如何界定个人声音的商业使用权。
😀 声音克隆的法律和商业价值
第二段讨论了声音克隆的法律问题和商业价值。如果个人的声音被广泛授权使用,那么声音的商业价值可能会降低。以斯嘉丽·约翰逊为例,如果她的声音被授权广泛使用,那么她的声音将不再是独一无二的,而是变得普遍。视频中提到,个人应该有权商业化地利用自己的声音或形象,这是公众形象权的一部分。如果声音被广泛使用,那么声音的独特性和商业价值可能会受到影响。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡人工智能
💡声音克隆
💡GPT 4.0
💡版权
💡声音模仿
💡公开宣传权
💡虚假代言
💡AI技术
💡声音许可
💡法律理论
💡公众舆论
Highlights
使用人工智能生成的声音克隆技术,模仿了著名演员斯嘉丽·约翰逊的声音。
斯嘉丽·约翰逊对OpenAI使用她的声音进行AI训练表示反对,因为她并未同意提供她的真实声音。
OpenAI最近发布了最新的AI模型GPT-4,其中包括一个名为Sky的音频交互角色。
斯嘉丽·约翰逊的声音在电影《她》中被用作虚拟助手的声音,这引发了关于AI技术在创意产业中应用的讨论。
AI技术在创意产业中可以作为强大的工具,帮助创作者,但同时也引发了关于AI取代创作者和艺术家的担忧。
演员和音乐家对AI技术的担忧与作家在电影行业中争取保护权利的斗争相似,以确保他们的声音不会被AI取代。
内容创作者,包括《纽约时报》,正在起诉OpenAI,认为AI工具在训练过程中使用了他们的内容,侵犯了版权。
法律理论包括公共形象权和虚假代言理论,这些理论可能适用于斯嘉丽·约翰逊的情况,以保护她的声音不被未经授权使用。
在确定一个声音是否属于某个人时,可能需要法官、陪审团或双方协商来解决,这取决于声音的相似度。
OpenAI在公众监督下,希望避免在公开法庭上与斯嘉丽·约翰逊的争议,而是寻求私下解决。
如果个人授权他们的声音被广泛使用,这可能会改变声音的价值主张,因为声音不再是专属于个人的。
个人应该有权决定他们的声音如何被商业利用,这取决于他们授权的范围。
法律专家讨论了声音克隆技术在版权法中的争议,以及如何保护个人的声音不被未经授权使用。
斯嘉丽·约翰逊的案例突显了AI技术在创意产业中应用的复杂性和法律挑战。
公众对AI技术的监督和法律框架的建立对于确保AI技术在创意产业中的合理和道德使用至关重要。
斯嘉丽·约翰逊的案例强调了个人声音的商业价值和保护个人声音的重要性。
AI技术的发展和应用需要在保护个人权利和促进创新之间找到平衡。
Transcripts
[Music]
hello this next door you are about to
hear is about artificial intelligence if
you wonder why my mouth isn't moving
that's because the voice you're hearing
is a clone of the voice you come to know
in love this is what a voice clone
sounds like now over to you John to
explain why we started this piece with a
voice clone what you just heard was me
sort of it was an artificial
intelligence generated audio clip we
created using my voice we created it is
the operative expression actress
Scarlett Johansson says the company open
AI used an AI generated version of her
voice that sounds eerily familiar to
hers and she wants them to stop it right
now the company recently unveiled its
latest AI model GPT 40 last week
featuring an audio interacting Persona
named Sky Johansson says the company
developed the voice without her
permission after she declined to offer
to provide her actual Voice open AI
denies this for context the voice sounds
similar to her appearance in the movie
Her where Johansson voices an
artificially intelligent virtual
assistant here's sky in action hey chat
I'm Mark how are you oh
Mark I'm doing great thanks for asking
how about you Joseph Lawler joins me now
he is an intellectual property attorney
for hannes and Boon LLP
so sag aftera the actress Union back
Johansson after she raised concerns they
struck last year as we all know during
the the actor and writer strike to fight
ai's use in the movie industry what is
the state of AI right now in Creative
Industries so AI can be a powerful tool
and it can help creators you know as you
just mentioned and we even saw this in
the writer strike that writers secured
important protections to ensure that
they'll be the ones writing scripts and
can use AI as an aid but the studio
bosses can't replace the writers with AI
actors and musicians have those same
concerns another front in that battle is
how those AI Technologies are learning
it's called training the AI you have to
feed data into the AI and some content
creators including the New York Times
are actually suing open Ai and their
legal theory is that the AI tools
improperly training on the content
created and owned by the times and other
Publications so in this Jo Hanson case h
How would one go about adjudicating this
in other words when is a voice does a
person's voice stop being a person's
voice and I would imagine it also has to
do with whether that person is
sufficiently uh famous or not Joe from
down on the Corner's voice um maybe
being not as protected as Scarlett
Johansson's that's right yeah Joe from
Brooklyn like myself probably not
protectable but a celebrity like Scarlet
Johansson is and there's really two
legal theories one is right of publicity
law you might have heard of Ni in the
college sports landscape talked about
recently in many states right of
publicity uh protects not only your name
image and likeness but also your voice
and celebrities when a voice imitation
is a vocative of That Celebrity might
have a cause of action for right of
publicity there's also a false
endorsement Theory so by using a voice
that sounds like Scarlett Johansson
consumers might be misled to believe
that she's actually endorsing the
product here chat GPT 4.0 so there are a
couple legal theories that might be
viable for Scarlett Johansson to enforce
her rights to be the only person to
commercially exploit the use of her
voice but in determining it um whether
it's her voice or not who makes that
determination is that a judge jury uh or
is this get settled out of court and you
know it when you see
it it kind of is one of those subjective
you know it when you see it or you know
it when you hear it um cases um but it
would be a jury ultimately um a judge
would have an initial say to see if it
was similar enough to even pass the
sniff test here it probably seems like
it would but look there's clearly PR
concerns here and I doubt this is a
battle that open eye would want open AI
would want to fight publicly in court as
opposed to trying to um settle this
dispute privately with um Scarlett
Johansson that's such a great point
because open AI is everybody's watching
them to make sure they stay on the right
side of the line on a thousand different
questions so bad idea to get on the
wrong side of it in a highly publicized
case final question quickly what happens
in a world where let's say you license
your voice and then everybody's using it
for whatever they want to do on their
web browser and everything else does
that change the value proposition of
your voice then when it goes out in
other instances you're no longer the
dulet tones of of Fred you're just you
know the voice everybody hears all the
time I think that's right and you know
the whole idea of right of publicity is
that an individual so in this example
Scarlet Johansson should have the right
to exploit commercially this Voice or
their image as they see fit so if you
were to license for example your voice
to be used widely across the web you
should be able to do that and the scope
of that license will really determine
your rights moving forward Joseph Lawler
thank you this was really fun thanks for
helping us understand it thank you
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)
Microsoft’s MacBook Killer?
Best AI Music Generator in 2024 - SUNO vs UDIO
These new computers are getting creepy… Copilot+ PC first look
Replay: The EASIEST way to create AI Cover Songs!
Lesson 2 – Technology Containers for AI
Warden vs Witch and Swamp Villager Army | Alex and Steve Legends (Minecraft Animation Movie)