this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024
88 points (78.6% liked)

Technology

59632 readers
4359 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SMillerNL 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

If the company uses a reference to you to make money, I’d definitely feel entitled to compensation.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

By reference do you mean somewhat similar sounding voice? This is status quo for voice acting. Do you think if someone tries to hire James Earl Jones for a voice part and he says no they throw their arms up, say fuck it and hire Megan Mullally? When hiring a voice actor you have a certain sound in mind you are going for and you take the closest thing your budget allows.

I do get off on how heated this whole debate has gotten with everyone picking the side of completely unrelatable rich people. I'm waiting for a good AI generated porno with altman and johansen reaching forgiveness in the form of a passionate 69.

[–] SMillerNL -2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

No, I mean referring to the movie Her which features the voice of Johansen as an AI assistant

[–] Grimy 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The producers of Her do not own the concept, nor does Scarlet. Nothing is referring to the movie other than it's a personal assistant with a bubbly womans voice which is much too broad and general to infringe on anything. Its not even close to being a unique concept either.

[–] SMillerNL -4 points 5 months ago

Except maybe tweeting the name of the movie: https://x.com/sama/status/1790075827666796666

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Doubt she has any rights to that movie though. That's not usually how things work. Again, let's bring in my good friend JEJ. When people mimic Darth Vader, he doesn't personally get a cut or have entitlement to any rights for mimicking that voice.

[–] Womble 3 points 5 months ago

This Hollywood idea that famous people are owed perpetual passive income for work they did decades ago needs to die in a fire.

[–] eager_eagle 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

It's not even a reference to Scarlett, it's at best a reference to a movie that she has no rights over.

She was offered a job, refused it, and they went with a different actress. She doesn't own her "likeness". They owe nothing to her or her ego.

[–] SMillerNL -1 points 5 months ago

But it doesn’t reference the whole movie, does it. It’s meant to invoke a memory of a specific character in the movie, since that’s the business Altman is in.

And we don’t know what kind of deal Johansen struck for that movie. Maybe she does own her likeness in it. We’ll see, I guess.