Hi ,
There's a reason multiple polls have shown that most people would choose Morgan Freeman to narrate their life story. And that cartoon movies can't seem to get released without a vocal cast of A-list actors.
Because your voice can be just as recognisable as your appearance. And the right voice can make or break a project.
So, it stands to reason Sam Altman would want OpenAI's new GPT-4o to have a distinctive voice.
However, last week's debate over whether OpenAI copied Scarlett Johannson's voice after she refused Altman's request to license it raises several important questions, including:
- What defines a person and their identity?
- What aspects of our identity do we truly own? and
- What are the ethics behind replicating such aspects without permission?
Here's the thing...
Since the
dawn of Hollywood, people have tried to use the names and likenesses of celebrities to cash in on their fame - frequently ending in a lawsuit. So, the idea of a business using an AI copy of someone's voice to promote their product seems like just a high-tech version of the same.
For the record, although Altman tweeted the word 'her' on the launch day of GPT-4o (which many have
interpreted as being a reference to the 2013 movie of that name, in which Johannson played an AI assistant) Altman claims the voice of GPT-4o was not intended to resemble Johannson's voice.
Nevertheless, whether OpenAI acted intentionally or not, the
community response to this story shows that most people believe a person's voice is their own and do not consider it ethical to use their voice (or an AI approximation of it) without their consent.
We will now have to wait and see how long it takes our laws to change to reflect this standard. I suspect we will be waiting a long time.
Talk again soon,
Dr Genevieve Hayes.
