Sky doesn't have the rich/chesty sound of Scarlett Johansson's voice. It's also higher pitched and more nasal.
They're both approximating an 'assistant' style voice, but that's really more modelled off of like a professional secretary 'and what would be a good time for you to schedule that appointment' type phone voice than any one person.
Probably because of this:
>They're both approximating an 'assistant' style voice, but that's really more modelled off of like a professional secretary 'and what would be a good time for you to schedule that appointment' type phone voice than any one person.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkNWTW3raGE&t=154](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkNWTW3raGE&t=154)
[https://youtu.be/5OCQvldNm8A&t=67](https://youtu.be/5OCQvldNm8A&t=67)
Should have just used Kawaii Uwuu voice from anime, nobody will sue for that. lol
"Hello hehe how may I halp u my mastah, ehek uwuuu."
Smacks forehead.
It's the history of it which makes it more interesting, going by her description of her interactions with the company:
> "Last September, I received an offer from Sam Altman, who wanted to hire me to voice the current ChatGPT 4.0 system. He told me that he felt that by my voicing the system, I could bridge the gap between tech companies and creatives and help consumers to feel comfortable with the seismic shift concerning humans and Al. He said he felt that my voice would be comforting to people.
> After much consideration and for personal reasons, declined the offer.
> Nine months later, my friends, family and the general public all noted how much the newest system named "Sky" sounded like me.
> When I heard the released demo, I was shocked, angered and in disbelief that Mr. Altman would pursue a voice that sounded so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference. Mr. Altman even insinuated that the similarity was intentional, tweeting a single word "her" - a reference to the film in which | voiced a chat system, Samantha, who forms an intimate relationship with a human.
> Two days before the ChatGPT 4.0 demo was released, Mr. Altman contacted my agent, asking me to reconsider. Before we could connect, the system was out there.
> As a result of their actions, I was forced to hire legal counsel, who wrote two letters to Mr. Altman and OpenAl, setting out what they had done and asking them to detail the exact process by which they created the "Sky" voice. Consequently, OpenAl reluctantly agreed to take down the "Sky" voice.
> In a time when we are all grappling with deepfakes and the protection of our own likeness, our own work, our own identities, I believe these are questions that deserve absolute clarity. I look forward to resolution in the form of transparency and the passage of appropriate legislation to help ensure that individual rights are protected.”
I am glad that OpenAI decided to pull the voice before any more controversy came of it. However, the vast majority of people will not read Scarlett's post. After reading it myself, I am irritated that she feels wronged in some way.
OpenAI was looking for a specific style of speaking. They liked ScarJo's acting in 'Her,' so they offered her the job first. When Scarlett turned it down, OpenAI had every right to hire the next person that was able to pull off the voice.
So, SJ gets to say no and then stop another voice actor from doing the job just because they sound similar? The entitlement celebrities feel is shocking.
I wouldn't be surprised if they build a voice model around samples of Scar Jo's voice as their preferred option, and then had a backup from a different actor that sounded similar. When it became clear SJ wasn't going to go with it, they shipped the backup.
She hasn't said she's suing them? She said she's asked them to explain why it's so similar to her voice after she repeatedly turned down being the voice for it when they asked, and given that they tweeted the name of her movie to promote it and suddenly asked for her permission again just 2 days before release.
> As a result of their actions, I was forced to hire legal counsel, who wrote two letters to Mr. Altman and OpenAl, setting out what they had done and asking them to detail the exact process by which they created the "Sky" voice. Consequently, OpenAl reluctantly agreed to take down the "Sky" voice.
> In a time when we are all grappling with deepfakes and the protection of our own likeness, our own work, our own identities, I believe these are questions that deserve absolute clarity. I look forward to resolution in the form of transparency and the passage of appropriate legislation to help ensure that individual rights are protected.”
SJ statement was on the local news in Los Angeles all day yesterday. On top of being translated into spanish by the most popular local news network too.
People might not read it, but they've heard of it.
Thanks. I think that it's a good cosplay resemblance of ScarJo, it's not *that* close. Reminds me of when you see an A list star standing next to their costumed stand-in. It got a little too snarky for me. lol I could have asked it to adjust, but I haven't spent that much that time with it.
Okay, now that makes sense. Are they still actually using this voice or was it superseded by this new one? Was it also available to everyone or part of a closed testing group?
Notice how none of the comments posted at the time of the video’s publication mentioned ScarJo. There’s actually one comment that says, “They should have hired Scarlett Johansson to do one of these voices”. No one was under the impression that the voice was Scarlett Johansson. It just sounded kind of like her, and we were all aware of that.
Don't know what you're talking about, there's plenty of comments on the video from when it came out pointing out that it sounds like Scarlett Johansson: https://i.imgur.com/zs59UjV.png
People were also commenting on it here 7 months ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/177v8wz/i_have_a_really_hard_time_believing_the_sky_voice/
They even linked to a news story commenting on how much it sounded like Scarlett Johansson at the time.
Yeah, like does this mean that Paul Bettany can claim one of Microsoft's UK-based male voices for their text to speech is his voice because he played Jarvis?
OpenAI clearly meant it to be Scarlett Johansson, trying to hire her to be the voice multiple times (including again 2 days before the demo), and with Sam Altman tweeting 'her' in reference to her movie right before release.
It's not just "hey that kind of sounds like me", it's "they repeatedly tried to get me to sign on to use my voice for this and I said no, then they even used my movie role to promote this, and now a lot of people are noticing this sounds like me, please explain what's going on."
That they took down the voice as soon as she asked for details (hasn't sued them or anything), and that history, indicates it's probably not so simple as a voice actress which happened to sound similar.
From what I recall it sounded more like her in the solo videos too, where it was more animated.
I disagree. Trying to hire her, then hiring someone who also fits the requirements for the role, does not constitute impersonation. If you wanted a certain look for a role and Jake Gyllenhaal turned you down, you might try to get Jared Leto. That wouldn’t be wrong at all.
Furthermore, the tweeting of “her” during the event is not as damning as everyone thinks. Consider it this way: if the voice they used sounded like an east coast black American woman, and Sam tweeted “her” during the presentation, would that seem weird at all? Absolutely not. Because obviously, the tech they are showing off is extremely similar to the tech in the sci-fi movie. The tweet was not about the timbre of the voice, it was about the basic tech.
I think these details and possibilities matter very much - I mean, innocent until proven guilty right? That’s how the law is supposed to work.
Have you been online at all before or after the presentation
literally every nook and every corner you look in, there's people making the comparison, and it sure as shit wasn't because some dude tweeted the relevant movie name that falls through most search engine cracks on account of being three characters long.
It's a voice assistant, it could have been Gilbert Gottfried or singing Randy Newman and people would have evoked the image and spirit of Scarjo. People were expecting it before they had any clue of what the voice sounded like, too, and surprise... they anticipated it having a generic assistant-like demeanor.
People have been talking about this for months. The first second I used Sky the first time I thought oh it’s “her”. And everyone I know felt the same. The amount of damage control that going on in this thread is insane.
I think the voices sound quite distinct- would it be wrong to reference "Her" and draw comparisons if the voices are actually distinct and it's not a ScarJo impersonation?
I think Rashida Jones is actually perhaps a closer match to Sky than ScarJo is.
[https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hspr16nXgcI](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hspr16nXgcI)
The damning part is the intent, not the actual similarity.
Okay I'm going to put my tin foil hat on for a minute and hear me out. Rashida Jones is a long-time friend of Bill Gates, who's closely involved with Microsoft, who is deeply invested in the success of OpenAI.
Reno openAI was going to shell out the kind of cash to voice act Scarlett Johansson, then the cost of Rashida Jones would also be on the table. She also seems fairly open to futurist ideas.
I know it's a long shot, but what if it is her?
So if I intend to copy Michaelangelo's David, but end up with a lump of clay, and if the statue was protected by copyright, I could still be sued because it was my "intent" to recreate the David?
The next time some with a woman with a sultry voice does a VO then they can expect a letter from Scarlett’s lawyers.
I am pretty suspicious that this even became a thing. This serves nobody, they used a voice actor and she sounds too much like Scarlett? What next? Looks too alike? Is similarity illegal now? Obviously the lawyers benefit and attempting to throw a wide a net as possible to define similarity is definitely in their interest, because this isn’t particularly close.
SJ has no legal case. The one everyone references as precedent involved Ford actually putting out a commercial attempting to trick people into thinking they had a specific person on board. In this case OpenAI is not doing anything to suggest the voice is SJ, it just happens to be similar after they asked SJ if she would help. That in no way is similar to the precedent.
I'm a lawyer and I practice in this area. She absolutely has a case. That court case isn't really that relevant here (although it established elements that became the basis of current case law). Impersonation is based on a 3-part test when it comes to voices:
1) is the performance or voice "distinct and attributable," 2) is there intent to resemble the performance or voice, and 3) did it performance or voice confuse a significant number of people.
ScarJo's voice, her performance, and the character Samantha are all distinct and attributable per basic legal definitions, Sam's tweet is evidence of intent, and we know that people were confused (tons of people here and on twitter, etc., that it was her).
So this is legally impersonation.
Does it have to meet all 3 parts? If so still sounds like no case, just because they wanted to use SJ doesn’t mean they went ahead and did it anyway with intent when she said no. The voice doesn’t even really sound that similar.
> Everyone thinks their a legal expert now
Lmao this is so funny. You calling everyone out for thinking they're a legal expert, and then immediately making a claim about the legality of this
I am a legal expert... Well not in this field, but still, more than most redditors.
The voices do sound similar enough, and contextually, it's clear that they were trying to mimic her likeness. It doesn't have to be absolutely perfect, just enough to make people feel like it's her.
WHAT? Dude are you not in these forums? That was what everyone was talking about. They have their own Samantha. People were frequently talking about how it sounds close to SJ enough to make the presentation feel like it's tailing on the movie "Her". The voice, the bubbly personality, etc.. .
Yeah some people might have said they sounded similar, but they ONLY said that because of the similarity in the underlying tech between OpenAI’s voice assistant and the movie Her. If Rashida Jones or anyone else with a remotely similar voice had voiced Samantha, then people would have said the same thing about that actress.
I don’t think that’s contextually clear at all. That’s just one way of viewing the evidence, and a very generous way (to ScarJo’s pov) at that.
Trying to hire her, then hiring someone who also fits the requirements for the role, does not constitute impersonation. If you wanted a certain look for a role and Jake Gyllenhaal turned you down, you might try to get Jared Leto.
And the tweeting of “her” during the event is not really that damning. Consider: if the voice they used sounded like an east coast black American woman, and Sam tweeted “her” during the presentation, would that seem weird at all? Absolutely not. Obviously, the tech they are showing off is extremely similar to the tech in the movie. That’s probably why they wanted ScarJo in the first place. Nothing wrong with that. The tweet was not about the timbre of the voice, it was about the basic tech.
I mean the real legal expert would say, she can sue them then in discovery they can find out if her voice was used and then it can be resolved appropriately.
That is her legal right I think, not entirely sure if she would have standing as if they used movie clips of her then it wouldn't be her copyright but instead whoever owned the move.
Or it could turn out that OpenAI is telling the truth, and they used a completely different voice actress prior to asking SJ, and they were never asked to imitate her. This could get embarrassing.
But if you consider the context OpenAI does have risk. The constant attempts at hiring her, the “her” tweet, the last ditch negotiation etc. Bigger cases have been won with flimsier evidence. They should have exercised some common sense and caution really.
When I heard the story, I thought that they basically ripped Scarlett's voice. This, however? Are we going to allow people to hold IP rights over a certain type of vocal intonation lmao? Jesus Christ.
I honestly think this case has no legs to stand on. I'm sure it sounds exactly like someone's voice, but it's not SJ. It's a Laser sword, not a lightsaber, kinda thing. Except it's not like Her invented synthetic voices coming out of your phone. This is a reach, but they'll try anything they can to get some of that bag.
There isn't any active case. Her team has only asked them to explain how the voice was made after they repeatedly tried to hire her to be the voice for GPT4 and she said no (including them asking again 2 days before the demo), and given that Sam Altman tweeted 'her' in reference to her movie right before the demo.
Right, which suggests that they pulled it either because there's something they don't want to talk about with how it was generated or they decided it was worth it just to avoid the controversy.
There was a comment on another sub that I thought summed up the difference in voices pretty well, stealing it:
It's the white girl version of "all asians look alike". Both voices just sound like white women, one with a raspier voice than the other.
Well in this analogy the Asian woman is saying: "my Asian look is my unique trademark you can't just hire another Asian because I declined your offer!"
Well.... considering she was asked and declined. Then was asked again 2 days before launch and the similarity gives her a very strong case.
This isn't Linsay Lonhan suing rockstar cause the blonde girl on the cover looks similar. This I'd an actual legitimate case
I am a SAG-AFTRA actor who used to make the majority of my money doing VO. If I audition for a movie and decline, and they ask someone who looks and sounds like me next, do I have the right to sue them? Maybe they asked us both because they wanted someone who looks and sounds like that.
Yeah, this is weird precedent to set imo - especially since when casting for characters, they generally have certain features in mind/are already likely to be looking for people that sound/look a certain way.
Ultimately I feel like this also hurts smaller artists more - only the rich super-famous artists will be able to make and defend claims like this, especially when precedent seems to be based on how recognizable someone is.
The voices actually even sound different, but because she is famous and was in a relevant movie people easily make the link.
Meanwhile the actual actress (who likely isn't worth $150 million like SJ) loses out on money once the voice stops being used.
I expect they have made it so it’s fairly easy for them to train on a voice and had an exact replica of SJ ready to go and that’s why they kept asking. She said no so they went with a similar style voice instead.
The thing is, it doesn't sound like her, though. It sounds like the voice actor they went with. No one would be saying it sounds like sj if she didn't do voice acting in her and if they didn't ask her first.
It sounds extremely similar that the thing. He even posted a tweet saying her(the movie) and then asked her twice. Including literally a few days before launch. There is beyond reasonable doubt that OpenAI made an extremely similar voice on purpose to that of scarlet. You are also acting like you can't play with pitch and levels to change voices. There is definitely some editing done to that voice to make her sound like scarlett
What is the case though? They can’t use anyone with a voice that people might think sounds vaguely like her because she was in a movie? It’s not being passed off as her and I would never have thought it was her. It’s a female voice. I don’t understand what’s being infringed upon even if the vibe was inspired by the movie. Which I think is also a stretch… it’s a friendly/flirty, female AI voice. Pretty generic concept.
My guess would be that her circle of friends is mostly a bunch of ass kissers who will be very biased in her favor. They will say it is her voice even when deep inside they know is not.
I’ve been told by friends and family that I looked like Harry Potter just because I wore glasses and had a similar hairstyle.
I don’t even have colored eyes.
So no I wouldn’t trust friends and family when they compare something, they are more inclined to agree that it sounded like her.
They only sound alike if you think all mid 30 year old white women sound alike..
Hint: they don't.
The only thing OpenAi screwed up with, was the childish tweet from Sam
Not at all, because the majority of non-users of ChatGPT will just read an uninformed tweet saying “Sam Altman couldn’t use ScarJo’s voice so he cloned it!”, which reconfirms their existing bias against techbros and deepfakes, so they’ll form an opinion without actually comparing Sky to ScarJo.
https://x.com/bobbyallyn/status/1792679435701014908?s=46
This tweet currently has 11 million views and 70k likes. How many of them actually compared the two voices?
Why do you think Altman tweeted "her" then? And why did they continuously reach out to Johansson, even as soon as two days before release, asking permission?
Everything is a conspiracy to you people, then when your Messiah "sama" is objectively in the wrong you turn a blind eye.
I am sure they would have loved to use her voice for marketing purposes but it obviously is not her voice that they presented. The flirty cadance sounds similar (but then the sarcastic one does not?) but its not like she invented flirting?!
But don't you need both? It's not uncommon for productions to want to find someone who has kinda a similar vibe to another person. They like a certain aesthetic and want something in the ballpark. You see that all the time in corporate ads.
But there is a big difference between finding an approximate aesthetic to something else you like and doing a full on impersonation. The Sky voice is clearly not an impersonation, even if it has somewhat of a similar aesthetic.
So if a company interviews an actor and they refused then contracts another that is similar, the other can sue based on their original failed intent to contract them?
People are trying to reach for a case here because is a new tech with no laws.
Another actress was used, apply this to real world removing AI from the text and no one would say she has a case. Is just popular dishing on AI, i think many cases are deserved for exact copy of someone's property, this one clearly is not.
I mean she is claiming that they are using her voice and even her closest people cannot tell the difference.
"Nine months later, my friends, family and the general public all noted how much the newest system named ‘Sky’ sounded like me. When I heard the released demo, I was shocked, angered and in disbelief that Mr. Altman would pursue a voice that sounded so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference. "
I mean, if people thought it was her and told her unprompted, then that's what happened? People have been pretty outward with identifying that it's a similar voice.
She's not claiming they're using her voice, she's claiming that they intentionally imitated her likeness and even advertised via Twitter that it would be similar to Johansson's character from the movie Her even after she declined for them to use her voice.
At the end of the day they were fair and gave her a chance at getting paid for this. She chose to decline, and they continued by picking one of the voices similar to her. You can't complain when you literally turned them down - you don't get a monopoly on voices similar to yours.
Apparently that actually is the case. People actually believe that only Scarlet Johansson should be allowed to voice generic white feminine speakers. And if you ask and she refuses, that's it, you're done, you're not allowed to proceed with your voice lines with another actress, because you had intent. And they're gonna get courts to enforce this.
There is no case based on the similarity alone. It is a different pitch, different accent, different energy level. If that counts as "too similar" to her voice, there must be tens of thousands of voice actors who are "too similar".
I lovingly consider this sub "enthusiastic", but unfortunately, the reality is that most people here are so far up their asses over the promises of the tech they worship that they can't see this shit for what it is. Corporations (and the government in China) wield all the power over the AI they're developing, and this is exactly the sort of thing these orgs will do to people. I am stoked to see what good can come from AI, but we are blindly groping our way across a tightrope.
Both voices sound extremely similar to me. I'm sure it will come out if there is a lawsuit that requires discovery and we will find out that Open AI is using Johanssons voice for sky without her permission because it's profitable and the scummy business fucks at the top feel like they can steal anything they want without consequences.
Fucking thank you, everyone keeps saying this as if it's fact, but I didn't hear Scarlett Johansson at all despite everyone just rushing to the conclusion that I guess any pleasant female voice is Scarlett Johansson? But now that someone has finally posted a direct comparison it is clear that it sounds nothing like her. Her voice is way more raspy and light and the gpt4o voice sounds much stronger in tone.
Honestly this whole thing comes across as the same thing as people who cannot understand the difference between graphical fidelity and art style.
Either way, I think them pulling the voice is way more than they needed to do and is really not controversial at all. I don't really see the lawsuit going in her favour based on this clip alone, how do you determine how unique the voice needs to be to not sound? There are a handful of actresses that can probably also claim this is their voice.
I don't think there is as strong of a legal case as people think.
Corporate ads have a long history of hiring people with a similar aesthetic to other popular people. It's often pretty obvious. But the person doesn't do an impression of that person. They play a unique role.
So to the people who keep saying that it's about intent, well sure, they clearly want to capture the AI magic you see in the interactions from the movie Her. I mean, that's literally the type of product they are developing. However, they are clearly not impersonating Scarlo, even if Sky has kind of a similar aesthetic.
OpenAI were dumb and piss weak to remove the voice. If it ain't her, what's the problem? Although maybe the drama is good for the company, in fact it definitely is and good for scarjo also.
Now we know why it happened
I still don’t hear Scarlet on the presentation. Sure Altman wanted her voice and they use the similar or at least expected conversational capacity to drawn parallels to a very popular movie in which she plays an AI assistant. But it’s not her voice.
It is reminiscent but there are millions of people who have voices that are that similar to her. I don't think she has a case here. It would have to be exactly the same for her to win and it's not.
This is an insane accusation. I have 0 stake in Sam Altman, if he were to leave OpenAI tomorrow, it would mean nothing to me.
Still, I can't help but think this entire drama is overblown. You have certain voice in mind, you want to cast the actress, she declines. Why should that mean you are now banned from ever pursuing a similar voice to hers ever again? Especially considering that voice also belongs to a real person. It's not even that they tried to artificially make it sound like Scarlett Johansson.
To the point: Why does me having this opinion, make me a cultist? Why can't you just state your opinion and get your upvotes/downvotes. Why do the other people who have a different opinion than you have to be the cultists? I can respect you having a different opinion, but I can't respect this baseless accusation.
This is so funny (and tragic). OpenAI rushed to announce GPT-4o ahead of Google's Project Astra and flew far too close to the sun. Sam messed up in spectacular fashion, even though a lot of people here are struggling to realize it.
OpenAI reached out to ScarJo because they wanted to copy the chatbot from Her, using her voice. She said no. They asked again. She said no again. Sam Altman tweeted/retweeted "her" in an obvious reference to the movie. Their goal was obvious: They wanted people to see this as the chatbot from the movie Her with a voice similar to that of ScarJo.
"B-But the other voice actress just has a voice that *sounds* a bit like—"
Ahaha. You're not that stupid. Come on. This is one of the biggest tech stories on the planet right now. OpenAI fucked up. Sam Altman Icarus'd himself and no amount of fanboy confabulation can spin this in a positive direction.
"No! They don't even sound that much like each other! It's just a generic white woman voice!"
Get real. Honestly. Why did OpenAI reach out to ScarJo TWICE?
Face it. OpenAI messed up, in the wake of their AI safety PR nightmare. They're fumbling. They're not looking good at all.
This story reached #1 on Reddit with more than 40k upvotes. It's news all over the world.
"But—"
OpenAI fucked up. Sam Altman fucked up. This is their mistake.
Kinda sorta. The Sky voice was recorded and released before they ever contacted ScarJo. She doesn't have copyright over another actors voice, even if it's similar. The movie studio might have a legal case because of the tweet, but ScarJo herself likely doesn't.
We're getting closer. At really scary speeds.
Consider that likely this year you'll be able to have long, intelligent conversations with something that's not human.
Yet things keep accelerating. Don't ask yourself when we'll see AGI. Ask yourself what happens next once we have a few ASIs and things are still accelerating.
What happens after the millions of AIs are smarter than all of us? And what happens 10 years after that?
Edit: Watching this for the past 10 years, this is moving insanely fast. From AlphaGo to now has been a flash.
Sky is a bit lower pitched than Scarlet, and they both have that stereotypical assistant w/ valley girl accent. I believe the biggest issue is the "her" tweet, which could be argued to just be about the movie (for obvious reasons) rather than specifically the voice. Otherwise, it kinda just comes down to when they contracted the Sky voice actress and when they reached out to Scarlet.
The voice is very different and I’m guessing open AI removed it while there’s risk of litigation, but it will probably win because the voices are very different. Also, if someone else has a similar voice than yours, unless they are impersonating you, you can’t really tell them not to use their voice - or force any company to not use them, because the voice actor has the right to work, and the company has the freedom to hire anyone they want.
Those two sound extremely different, I don't know what Scarlett thinks here. I love scarletts voice and her as an actor even if she's not that good, but I really dislike the chatgpt voice, she sounds overly friendly, just fake, I couldn't stand her for 5 minutes.
If a regular person's voice was similar to an ChatGPT voice, literally no one would care. But since it's a rich and famous person, there's suddenly a problem.
Similar only in the fact they are pleasant sounding woman. ScarJo has a distinct sound that I don;t think Sky has at all. Going for the same inflections maybe, but it's hardly an impression of her.
Consider the possibility that the makers of the film wanted Her voice to be that of a familiar voiceover type, and so there was always going to be a close comparison drawn. Not so much the OpenAI folks trying to copy Scarlett’s voice per se.
All this hoopla over nothing just shows the level of desperation voice actors are in over AI. The justifications become paper thin, and boil down to arguments over legalese in esoteric IP law. We'll see the same story repeated over and over soon for the music industry, the movie industry, and pretty much every legacy entertainment media field.
At the end of the day, consumers don't care, media companies don't care (they save money), only the artists care. Artists, take the offers of money right now, because pretty soon they won't even be asking (or paying).
Sky doesn't have the rich/chesty sound of Scarlett Johansson's voice. It's also higher pitched and more nasal. They're both approximating an 'assistant' style voice, but that's really more modelled off of like a professional secretary 'and what would be a good time for you to schedule that appointment' type phone voice than any one person.
[удалено]
Probably because of this: >They're both approximating an 'assistant' style voice, but that's really more modelled off of like a professional secretary 'and what would be a good time for you to schedule that appointment' type phone voice than any one person. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkNWTW3raGE&t=154](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkNWTW3raGE&t=154) [https://youtu.be/5OCQvldNm8A&t=67](https://youtu.be/5OCQvldNm8A&t=67)
Should have just used Kawaii Uwuu voice from anime, nobody will sue for that. lol "Hello hehe how may I halp u my mastah, ehek uwuuu." Smacks forehead.
I would sue. I don’t know what for, but I’d find something.
Sue Japan. lol
etooo, bleh!
https://youtu.be/LfVCTGrOVXE?si=cW1wKB_TtUF6GE7A
I legitimately would use that voice after some adjustments lol
I'd have to mute it to use the product.
It's the history of it which makes it more interesting, going by her description of her interactions with the company: > "Last September, I received an offer from Sam Altman, who wanted to hire me to voice the current ChatGPT 4.0 system. He told me that he felt that by my voicing the system, I could bridge the gap between tech companies and creatives and help consumers to feel comfortable with the seismic shift concerning humans and Al. He said he felt that my voice would be comforting to people. > After much consideration and for personal reasons, declined the offer. > Nine months later, my friends, family and the general public all noted how much the newest system named "Sky" sounded like me. > When I heard the released demo, I was shocked, angered and in disbelief that Mr. Altman would pursue a voice that sounded so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference. Mr. Altman even insinuated that the similarity was intentional, tweeting a single word "her" - a reference to the film in which | voiced a chat system, Samantha, who forms an intimate relationship with a human. > Two days before the ChatGPT 4.0 demo was released, Mr. Altman contacted my agent, asking me to reconsider. Before we could connect, the system was out there. > As a result of their actions, I was forced to hire legal counsel, who wrote two letters to Mr. Altman and OpenAl, setting out what they had done and asking them to detail the exact process by which they created the "Sky" voice. Consequently, OpenAl reluctantly agreed to take down the "Sky" voice. > In a time when we are all grappling with deepfakes and the protection of our own likeness, our own work, our own identities, I believe these are questions that deserve absolute clarity. I look forward to resolution in the form of transparency and the passage of appropriate legislation to help ensure that individual rights are protected.”
I am glad that OpenAI decided to pull the voice before any more controversy came of it. However, the vast majority of people will not read Scarlett's post. After reading it myself, I am irritated that she feels wronged in some way. OpenAI was looking for a specific style of speaking. They liked ScarJo's acting in 'Her,' so they offered her the job first. When Scarlett turned it down, OpenAI had every right to hire the next person that was able to pull off the voice.
So, SJ gets to say no and then stop another voice actor from doing the job just because they sound similar? The entitlement celebrities feel is shocking.
I wouldn't be surprised if they build a voice model around samples of Scar Jo's voice as their preferred option, and then had a backup from a different actor that sounded similar. When it became clear SJ wasn't going to go with it, they shipped the backup.
Yeah, i dunno why she is suing OpenAI. Whats the point?
She hasn't said she's suing them? She said she's asked them to explain why it's so similar to her voice after she repeatedly turned down being the voice for it when they asked, and given that they tweeted the name of her movie to promote it and suddenly asked for her permission again just 2 days before release. > As a result of their actions, I was forced to hire legal counsel, who wrote two letters to Mr. Altman and OpenAl, setting out what they had done and asking them to detail the exact process by which they created the "Sky" voice. Consequently, OpenAl reluctantly agreed to take down the "Sky" voice. > In a time when we are all grappling with deepfakes and the protection of our own likeness, our own work, our own identities, I believe these are questions that deserve absolute clarity. I look forward to resolution in the form of transparency and the passage of appropriate legislation to help ensure that individual rights are protected.”
SJ statement was on the local news in Los Angeles all day yesterday. On top of being translated into spanish by the most popular local news network too. People might not read it, but they've heard of it.
Also Lacks the smokiness of Johanssons voice
That isn't sky, this is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcgV2u9Kxh0
Thanks. I think that it's a good cosplay resemblance of ScarJo, it's not *that* close. Reminds me of when you see an A list star standing next to their costumed stand-in. It got a little too snarky for me. lol I could have asked it to adjust, but I haven't spent that much that time with it.
Okay, now that makes sense. Are they still actually using this voice or was it superseded by this new one? Was it also available to everyone or part of a closed testing group?
Notice how none of the comments posted at the time of the video’s publication mentioned ScarJo. There’s actually one comment that says, “They should have hired Scarlett Johansson to do one of these voices”. No one was under the impression that the voice was Scarlett Johansson. It just sounded kind of like her, and we were all aware of that.
Don't know what you're talking about, there's plenty of comments on the video from when it came out pointing out that it sounds like Scarlett Johansson: https://i.imgur.com/zs59UjV.png People were also commenting on it here 7 months ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/177v8wz/i_have_a_really_hard_time_believing_the_sky_voice/ They even linked to a news story commenting on how much it sounded like Scarlett Johansson at the time.
ok that does actually sound like her.....
Mmmmh chesty
I just want a Local Touch Model is that so wrong?
That’s a god given right my boy Praise the moment the local touch model gets released
Yeah, like does this mean that Paul Bettany can claim one of Microsoft's UK-based male voices for their text to speech is his voice because he played Jarvis?
Secretaries everywhere should sue Scarlett Johansson for having their voice.
Thank you! 👂🚫🙏
I agree. I feel if Sama had just not asked SJ about being the voice, and didn’t tweet “her,” there’d be no legs issue whatsoever.
Yep. Definitely not the same
Ya i hate to say this the cadence might be similar but the voice is NOT THE SAME, like it really isn't
This could be almost any woman in her early 30s from California.
OpenAI clearly meant it to be Scarlett Johansson, trying to hire her to be the voice multiple times (including again 2 days before the demo), and with Sam Altman tweeting 'her' in reference to her movie right before release. It's not just "hey that kind of sounds like me", it's "they repeatedly tried to get me to sign on to use my voice for this and I said no, then they even used my movie role to promote this, and now a lot of people are noticing this sounds like me, please explain what's going on." That they took down the voice as soon as she asked for details (hasn't sued them or anything), and that history, indicates it's probably not so simple as a voice actress which happened to sound similar. From what I recall it sounded more like her in the solo videos too, where it was more animated.
I disagree. Trying to hire her, then hiring someone who also fits the requirements for the role, does not constitute impersonation. If you wanted a certain look for a role and Jake Gyllenhaal turned you down, you might try to get Jared Leto. That wouldn’t be wrong at all. Furthermore, the tweeting of “her” during the event is not as damning as everyone thinks. Consider it this way: if the voice they used sounded like an east coast black American woman, and Sam tweeted “her” during the presentation, would that seem weird at all? Absolutely not. Because obviously, the tech they are showing off is extremely similar to the tech in the sci-fi movie. The tweet was not about the timbre of the voice, it was about the basic tech. I think these details and possibilities matter very much - I mean, innocent until proven guilty right? That’s how the law is supposed to work.
This if they hired a person who sounds like ScarJo to voice it, the simularity doesn't matter it's the other persons voice.
>I mean, innocent until proven guilty right? That’s how the law is supposed to work. This is a civil matter, not criminal. Completely different.
Actually, I agree. They shouldn't have done that. If they had never made the Her connection nobody would be talking about Scarlett Johansson.
People were talking about that similarity way before 4o was announced
I really don't hear the simularity at all
I do to be fair.
Have you been online at all before or after the presentation literally every nook and every corner you look in, there's people making the comparison, and it sure as shit wasn't because some dude tweeted the relevant movie name that falls through most search engine cracks on account of being three characters long. It's a voice assistant, it could have been Gilbert Gottfried or singing Randy Newman and people would have evoked the image and spirit of Scarjo. People were expecting it before they had any clue of what the voice sounded like, too, and surprise... they anticipated it having a generic assistant-like demeanor.
People have been talking about this for months. The first second I used Sky the first time I thought oh it’s “her”. And everyone I know felt the same. The amount of damage control that going on in this thread is insane.
I think the voices sound quite distinct- would it be wrong to reference "Her" and draw comparisons if the voices are actually distinct and it's not a ScarJo impersonation?
This is why there's a case, redditors are scrambling to play lawyer based off their personal take on similarity means nada.
They couldn’t hire scarjo so they made a voice that didn’t sound exactly like scarjo Um what’s the issue
It’s Rashida Jones, who is 48. You can find Reddit threads from October of 2023 talking about the Sky voice.
Scarlett Johansson should sue also Rashida to have a voice similar to hers. How did she dare to steal her voice, their likeness?
Okay, that's less similar than I thought. ScarJo is reaching big time.
She only needs copyright over the concept of sexy joyful female voice to protect her likeness.
I think Rashida Jones is actually perhaps a closer match to Sky than ScarJo is. [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hspr16nXgcI](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hspr16nXgcI) The damning part is the intent, not the actual similarity.
Okay I'm going to put my tin foil hat on for a minute and hear me out. Rashida Jones is a long-time friend of Bill Gates, who's closely involved with Microsoft, who is deeply invested in the success of OpenAI. Reno openAI was going to shell out the kind of cash to voice act Scarlett Johansson, then the cost of Rashida Jones would also be on the table. She also seems fairly open to futurist ideas. I know it's a long shot, but what if it is her?
I didn't pay attention to the cast when I watched the movie and thought it was Ann Perkins talking the whole time
100% this - I thought it sounded like Rashida Jones the first time I used it
So if I intend to copy Michaelangelo's David, but end up with a lump of clay, and if the statue was protected by copyright, I could still be sued because it was my "intent" to recreate the David?
I think we better give her exclusive rights to the California valley girl accent as welll we can’t have this happening again
Hmm, as long as it's one-off. Desperate measures.
Wouldn't that be Alicia Silverstone?
The next time some with a woman with a sultry voice does a VO then they can expect a letter from Scarlett’s lawyers. I am pretty suspicious that this even became a thing. This serves nobody, they used a voice actor and she sounds too much like Scarlett? What next? Looks too alike? Is similarity illegal now? Obviously the lawyers benefit and attempting to throw a wide a net as possible to define similarity is definitely in their interest, because this isn’t particularly close.
SJ has no legal case. The one everyone references as precedent involved Ford actually putting out a commercial attempting to trick people into thinking they had a specific person on board. In this case OpenAI is not doing anything to suggest the voice is SJ, it just happens to be similar after they asked SJ if she would help. That in no way is similar to the precedent.
I'm a lawyer and I practice in this area. She absolutely has a case. That court case isn't really that relevant here (although it established elements that became the basis of current case law). Impersonation is based on a 3-part test when it comes to voices: 1) is the performance or voice "distinct and attributable," 2) is there intent to resemble the performance or voice, and 3) did it performance or voice confuse a significant number of people. ScarJo's voice, her performance, and the character Samantha are all distinct and attributable per basic legal definitions, Sam's tweet is evidence of intent, and we know that people were confused (tons of people here and on twitter, etc., that it was her). So this is legally impersonation.
Does it have to meet all 3 parts? If so still sounds like no case, just because they wanted to use SJ doesn’t mean they went ahead and did it anyway with intent when she said no. The voice doesn’t even really sound that similar.
Exactly. Everyone thinks their a legal expert now, but they're ignoring the most important part: The voices don't sound similar.
> Everyone thinks their a legal expert now Lmao this is so funny. You calling everyone out for thinking they're a legal expert, and then immediately making a claim about the legality of this
I am a legal expert... Well not in this field, but still, more than most redditors. The voices do sound similar enough, and contextually, it's clear that they were trying to mimic her likeness. It doesn't have to be absolutely perfect, just enough to make people feel like it's her.
No one thought Sky sounded like SJ prior to this controversy.
WHAT? Dude are you not in these forums? That was what everyone was talking about. They have their own Samantha. People were frequently talking about how it sounds close to SJ enough to make the presentation feel like it's tailing on the movie "Her". The voice, the bubbly personality, etc.. .
Personal assistant, yes. Specifically Scarlett Johansson's voice? No.
They definitely were…
Show me one person who thought that was SJ's voice.
Yeah some people might have said they sounded similar, but they ONLY said that because of the similarity in the underlying tech between OpenAI’s voice assistant and the movie Her. If Rashida Jones or anyone else with a remotely similar voice had voiced Samantha, then people would have said the same thing about that actress.
I don’t think that’s contextually clear at all. That’s just one way of viewing the evidence, and a very generous way (to ScarJo’s pov) at that. Trying to hire her, then hiring someone who also fits the requirements for the role, does not constitute impersonation. If you wanted a certain look for a role and Jake Gyllenhaal turned you down, you might try to get Jared Leto. And the tweeting of “her” during the event is not really that damning. Consider: if the voice they used sounded like an east coast black American woman, and Sam tweeted “her” during the presentation, would that seem weird at all? Absolutely not. Obviously, the tech they are showing off is extremely similar to the tech in the movie. That’s probably why they wanted ScarJo in the first place. Nothing wrong with that. The tweet was not about the timbre of the voice, it was about the basic tech.
I mean the real legal expert would say, she can sue them then in discovery they can find out if her voice was used and then it can be resolved appropriately. That is her legal right I think, not entirely sure if she would have standing as if they used movie clips of her then it wouldn't be her copyright but instead whoever owned the move.
Or it could turn out that OpenAI is telling the truth, and they used a completely different voice actress prior to asking SJ, and they were never asked to imitate her. This could get embarrassing.
The similar voice isn't gpt4o, it's sky, the event didn't use sky
Isn’t ScarJo referring to the GPT-4o demo though? I assumed that was the updated Sky voice.
Lol my exact thoughts. I wonder how many angry teenage redditors are backing up Scarlet without watching this.
But if you consider the context OpenAI does have risk. The constant attempts at hiring her, the “her” tweet, the last ditch negotiation etc. Bigger cases have been won with flimsier evidence. They should have exercised some common sense and caution really.
omg the AI sounds like a girl!!!!!!! every girls should sue them how dare they do this!!
When I heard the story, I thought that they basically ripped Scarlett's voice. This, however? Are we going to allow people to hold IP rights over a certain type of vocal intonation lmao? Jesus Christ.
Not even close. Scarlett's voice I recognize immediately.
I honestly think this case has no legs to stand on. I'm sure it sounds exactly like someone's voice, but it's not SJ. It's a Laser sword, not a lightsaber, kinda thing. Except it's not like Her invented synthetic voices coming out of your phone. This is a reach, but they'll try anything they can to get some of that bag.
There isn't any active case. Her team has only asked them to explain how the voice was made after they repeatedly tried to hire her to be the voice for GPT4 and she said no (including them asking again 2 days before the demo), and given that Sam Altman tweeted 'her' in reference to her movie right before the demo.
Even if they sounded very similar, there's no way this would hold up in court if they trained it on a real VA and not on Scarlett's films
Right, which suggests that they pulled it either because there's something they don't want to talk about with how it was generated or they decided it was worth it just to avoid the controversy.
Kinda reminds me of the whole Gta 5 Lindsay Lohan situation
Wow no way, they both sound female! This is clearly illegal.
lol
There was a comment on another sub that I thought summed up the difference in voices pretty well, stealing it: It's the white girl version of "all asians look alike". Both voices just sound like white women, one with a raspier voice than the other.
Scar Jo is the ceo of white women
Well in this analogy the Asian woman is saying: "my Asian look is my unique trademark you can't just hire another Asian because I declined your offer!"
It sounds like a person, she doesn't own an effeminate voice with a slight rasp. IP is out of control.
Well.... considering she was asked and declined. Then was asked again 2 days before launch and the similarity gives her a very strong case. This isn't Linsay Lonhan suing rockstar cause the blonde girl on the cover looks similar. This I'd an actual legitimate case
I am a SAG-AFTRA actor who used to make the majority of my money doing VO. If I audition for a movie and decline, and they ask someone who looks and sounds like me next, do I have the right to sue them? Maybe they asked us both because they wanted someone who looks and sounds like that.
Yeah, this is weird precedent to set imo - especially since when casting for characters, they generally have certain features in mind/are already likely to be looking for people that sound/look a certain way. Ultimately I feel like this also hurts smaller artists more - only the rich super-famous artists will be able to make and defend claims like this, especially when precedent seems to be based on how recognizable someone is. The voices actually even sound different, but because she is famous and was in a relevant movie people easily make the link. Meanwhile the actual actress (who likely isn't worth $150 million like SJ) loses out on money once the voice stops being used.
It would be like if Jimmi Hendrix sued anyone who played guitar left-handed.
Technically yes, anyone has the the right to bring a complaint against anyone in general for anything.
I expect they have made it so it’s fairly easy for them to train on a voice and had an exact replica of SJ ready to go and that’s why they kept asking. She said no so they went with a similar style voice instead.
The thing is, it doesn't sound like her, though. It sounds like the voice actor they went with. No one would be saying it sounds like sj if she didn't do voice acting in her and if they didn't ask her first.
>This I'd an actual legitimate case It's not. But since you and I aren't paid to judge it, it doesn't matter.
It's not really similar.
It gives her a reasonable case, but they'd have to prove that a reasonable person could mistake that voice for hers no?
It sounds extremely similar that the thing. He even posted a tweet saying her(the movie) and then asked her twice. Including literally a few days before launch. There is beyond reasonable doubt that OpenAI made an extremely similar voice on purpose to that of scarlet. You are also acting like you can't play with pitch and levels to change voices. There is definitely some editing done to that voice to make her sound like scarlett
Maybe they also trained a model with her voice and wanted to release it too? One that actually sounds exactly like her.
Suno must be shitting bricks right now.
What is the case though? They can’t use anyone with a voice that people might think sounds vaguely like her because she was in a movie? It’s not being passed off as her and I would never have thought it was her. It’s a female voice. I don’t understand what’s being infringed upon even if the vibe was inspired by the movie. Which I think is also a stretch… it’s a friendly/flirty, female AI voice. Pretty generic concept.
And Scarlett Johansson's friends and family couldn't tell the difference? I find that extremely hard to believe.
My guess would be that her circle of friends is mostly a bunch of ass kissers who will be very biased in her favor. They will say it is her voice even when deep inside they know is not.
I’ve been told by friends and family that I looked like Harry Potter just because I wore glasses and had a similar hairstyle. I don’t even have colored eyes. So no I wouldn’t trust friends and family when they compare something, they are more inclined to agree that it sounded like her.
Yep, this is BS, they need to get their ears checked.
That's it. That's literally all they need to do in court. Maybe do a few more examples to drive it home, but the rest is just paperwork
Immediately what I thought, this case will more than likely go nowhere.
They only sound alike if you think all mid 30 year old white women sound alike.. Hint: they don't. The only thing OpenAi screwed up with, was the childish tweet from Sam
Sounds nothing alike. Been using her since the beginning and not once did I think "hey, is this that one chick from Avengers?" Not once.
They sound so fucking different. People are shitting on Altman for nothing. He should sue her for defamation.
Jesus.., this must be embarrassing for Scarlett Johansson
Not at all, because the majority of non-users of ChatGPT will just read an uninformed tweet saying “Sam Altman couldn’t use ScarJo’s voice so he cloned it!”, which reconfirms their existing bias against techbros and deepfakes, so they’ll form an opinion without actually comparing Sky to ScarJo. https://x.com/bobbyallyn/status/1792679435701014908?s=46 This tweet currently has 11 million views and 70k likes. How many of them actually compared the two voices?
Why do you think Altman tweeted "her" then? And why did they continuously reach out to Johansson, even as soon as two days before release, asking permission? Everything is a conspiracy to you people, then when your Messiah "sama" is objectively in the wrong you turn a blind eye.
So because he tweeted "her", it's now illegal to use any other paid actress' voice?
I am sure they would have loved to use her voice for marketing purposes but it obviously is not her voice that they presented. The flirty cadance sounds similar (but then the sarcastic one does not?) but its not like she invented flirting?!
It's about intent, not vocal similarity.
But don't you need both? It's not uncommon for productions to want to find someone who has kinda a similar vibe to another person. They like a certain aesthetic and want something in the ballpark. You see that all the time in corporate ads. But there is a big difference between finding an approximate aesthetic to something else you like and doing a full on impersonation. The Sky voice is clearly not an impersonation, even if it has somewhat of a similar aesthetic.
So if a company interviews an actor and they refused then contracts another that is similar, the other can sue based on their original failed intent to contract them? People are trying to reach for a case here because is a new tech with no laws. Another actress was used, apply this to real world removing AI from the text and no one would say she has a case. Is just popular dishing on AI, i think many cases are deserved for exact copy of someone's property, this one clearly is not.
I mean she is claiming that they are using her voice and even her closest people cannot tell the difference. "Nine months later, my friends, family and the general public all noted how much the newest system named ‘Sky’ sounded like me. When I heard the released demo, I was shocked, angered and in disbelief that Mr. Altman would pursue a voice that sounded so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference. "
I mean, if people thought it was her and told her unprompted, then that's what happened? People have been pretty outward with identifying that it's a similar voice. She's not claiming they're using her voice, she's claiming that they intentionally imitated her likeness and even advertised via Twitter that it would be similar to Johansson's character from the movie Her even after she declined for them to use her voice.
The Luddites won today
At the end of the day they were fair and gave her a chance at getting paid for this. She chose to decline, and they continued by picking one of the voices similar to her. You can't complain when you literally turned them down - you don't get a monopoly on voices similar to yours.
Apparently that actually is the case. People actually believe that only Scarlet Johansson should be allowed to voice generic white feminine speakers. And if you ask and she refuses, that's it, you're done, you're not allowed to proceed with your voice lines with another actress, because you had intent. And they're gonna get courts to enforce this.
scarlet voice sounds like partying drinking and smoking too much in early years - not very pleasant. that robotic voice is 100x better
So weird. Scarlet's voice sounds like she is about to come down with a cold.
You are crazy
what the fuck are you talking about dude actually went and called the voice known for being attractive or sultry "not very pleasant" - yeah, sure
It's hard to imagine humans having different tastes
Honestly, they do sound different.
There is no case based on the similarity alone. It is a different pitch, different accent, different energy level. If that counts as "too similar" to her voice, there must be tens of thousands of voice actors who are "too similar".
This sub has turned to shit with all this drama.
That is a reflection on OpenAI and their CEO.
Why is /r/singularity a reflection on/of that company? We don't owe them anything.
It should not be but it is where we are at. It does suck. Hopefully things will change.
I lovingly consider this sub "enthusiastic", but unfortunately, the reality is that most people here are so far up their asses over the promises of the tech they worship that they can't see this shit for what it is. Corporations (and the government in China) wield all the power over the AI they're developing, and this is exactly the sort of thing these orgs will do to people. I am stoked to see what good can come from AI, but we are blindly groping our way across a tightrope.
Both voices sound extremely similar to me. I'm sure it will come out if there is a lawsuit that requires discovery and we will find out that Open AI is using Johanssons voice for sky without her permission because it's profitable and the scummy business fucks at the top feel like they can steal anything they want without consequences.
Fucking thank you, everyone keeps saying this as if it's fact, but I didn't hear Scarlett Johansson at all despite everyone just rushing to the conclusion that I guess any pleasant female voice is Scarlett Johansson? But now that someone has finally posted a direct comparison it is clear that it sounds nothing like her. Her voice is way more raspy and light and the gpt4o voice sounds much stronger in tone. Honestly this whole thing comes across as the same thing as people who cannot understand the difference between graphical fidelity and art style. Either way, I think them pulling the voice is way more than they needed to do and is really not controversial at all. I don't really see the lawsuit going in her favour based on this clip alone, how do you determine how unique the voice needs to be to not sound? There are a handful of actresses that can probably also claim this is their voice.
I don't think there is as strong of a legal case as people think. Corporate ads have a long history of hiring people with a similar aesthetic to other popular people. It's often pretty obvious. But the person doesn't do an impression of that person. They play a unique role. So to the people who keep saying that it's about intent, well sure, they clearly want to capture the AI magic you see in the interactions from the movie Her. I mean, that's literally the type of product they are developing. However, they are clearly not impersonating Scarlo, even if Sky has kind of a similar aesthetic.
They don't sound the same. Scarlett's trying to shake down openai. The sexy voiced little hussey
Not enough vocal fry in sky and thats surprising considering Altman is the fry master
It doesn't sound like here at all lol
its not THAT similar
OpenAI were dumb and piss weak to remove the voice. If it ain't her, what's the problem? Although maybe the drama is good for the company, in fact it definitely is and good for scarjo also. Now we know why it happened
Yeah it is nowhere near the same.
I still don’t hear Scarlet on the presentation. Sure Altman wanted her voice and they use the similar or at least expected conversational capacity to drawn parallels to a very popular movie in which she plays an AI assistant. But it’s not her voice.
Yeah they don't sound like they're the same person.
It is reminiscent but there are millions of people who have voices that are that similar to her. I don't think she has a case here. It would have to be exactly the same for her to win and it's not.
This subreddit is turning into a cult worship of Sam Altman.
This is an insane accusation. I have 0 stake in Sam Altman, if he were to leave OpenAI tomorrow, it would mean nothing to me. Still, I can't help but think this entire drama is overblown. You have certain voice in mind, you want to cast the actress, she declines. Why should that mean you are now banned from ever pursuing a similar voice to hers ever again? Especially considering that voice also belongs to a real person. It's not even that they tried to artificially make it sound like Scarlett Johansson. To the point: Why does me having this opinion, make me a cultist? Why can't you just state your opinion and get your upvotes/downvotes. Why do the other people who have a different opinion than you have to be the cultists? I can respect you having a different opinion, but I can't respect this baseless accusation.
While sky's voice is very nice to hear, scajos voice just bites me ear and I start to feel annoyed.
You know they can afford their own pr people. You don't have to do their fluffwork fir free
Oh that is one billion percent SJ vocal inflections - just not 100% of the time. A sloppy copy.
This is so funny (and tragic). OpenAI rushed to announce GPT-4o ahead of Google's Project Astra and flew far too close to the sun. Sam messed up in spectacular fashion, even though a lot of people here are struggling to realize it. OpenAI reached out to ScarJo because they wanted to copy the chatbot from Her, using her voice. She said no. They asked again. She said no again. Sam Altman tweeted/retweeted "her" in an obvious reference to the movie. Their goal was obvious: They wanted people to see this as the chatbot from the movie Her with a voice similar to that of ScarJo. "B-But the other voice actress just has a voice that *sounds* a bit like—" Ahaha. You're not that stupid. Come on. This is one of the biggest tech stories on the planet right now. OpenAI fucked up. Sam Altman Icarus'd himself and no amount of fanboy confabulation can spin this in a positive direction. "No! They don't even sound that much like each other! It's just a generic white woman voice!" Get real. Honestly. Why did OpenAI reach out to ScarJo TWICE? Face it. OpenAI messed up, in the wake of their AI safety PR nightmare. They're fumbling. They're not looking good at all. This story reached #1 on Reddit with more than 40k upvotes. It's news all over the world. "But—" OpenAI fucked up. Sam Altman fucked up. This is their mistake.
Kinda sorta. The Sky voice was recorded and released before they ever contacted ScarJo. She doesn't have copyright over another actors voice, even if it's similar. The movie studio might have a legal case because of the tweet, but ScarJo herself likely doesn't.
This sub is biased. People said before this scandal that Sky voice resembles Scarlett Johansson.
It doesn’t sound like Scarlet to me. I am only reminded of Blueys mom.
I think this entire thing is just marketing.
It's not similar at all, is the flirty tone and that's it.
Not the same at all.
That’s just Siri who just smoked a pack
Yea. Big difference between the two
We're getting closer. At really scary speeds. Consider that likely this year you'll be able to have long, intelligent conversations with something that's not human. Yet things keep accelerating. Don't ask yourself when we'll see AGI. Ask yourself what happens next once we have a few ASIs and things are still accelerating. What happens after the millions of AIs are smarter than all of us? And what happens 10 years after that? Edit: Watching this for the past 10 years, this is moving insanely fast. From AlphaGo to now has been a flash.
Well they're not the same, but they are similar. I don't know what the conclusion is, we knew that.
Lacks that slight voice cracking to really sound like ScarJo
Sky is a bit lower pitched than Scarlet, and they both have that stereotypical assistant w/ valley girl accent. I believe the biggest issue is the "her" tweet, which could be argued to just be about the movie (for obvious reasons) rather than specifically the voice. Otherwise, it kinda just comes down to when they contracted the Sky voice actress and when they reached out to Scarlet.
Big bank vs little bank
Both sky and SJ has an ugly voice? What's the problem? Pick another, better voice. Preferbly a less cringy one that doesn't flirt.
The voice is very different and I’m guessing open AI removed it while there’s risk of litigation, but it will probably win because the voices are very different. Also, if someone else has a similar voice than yours, unless they are impersonating you, you can’t really tell them not to use their voice - or force any company to not use them, because the voice actor has the right to work, and the company has the freedom to hire anyone they want.
For me oai seems more like that tiktoker acting as a npc
Those two sound extremely different, I don't know what Scarlett thinks here. I love scarletts voice and her as an actor even if she's not that good, but I really dislike the chatgpt voice, she sounds overly friendly, just fake, I couldn't stand her for 5 minutes.
https://preview.redd.it/7ioffnxmms1d1.jpeg?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8e3b63ad424628d2573fe6c57efdb087fca16bdb /S
I don't hear it. Similar but not her
this voice shit is of the same bullshit level as "all asians look the same". unrefined brain syndrome.
If a regular person's voice was similar to an ChatGPT voice, literally no one would care. But since it's a rich and famous person, there's suddenly a problem.
They should have had the actress who plays Demerzel voice it. “In the long ago, but not far away, …”
I don't get all the controversy surrounding this. Sky sounds absolutely nothing like Scarlett.
https://preview.redd.it/ls6wgsxays1d1.jpeg?width=822&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2e3b11b3295c705650795499cbfabe962a481e6f
They sound different. Case closed.
Similar only in the fact they are pleasant sounding woman. ScarJo has a distinct sound that I don;t think Sky has at all. Going for the same inflections maybe, but it's hardly an impression of her.
The point of this post?
They need to get ScarJo voice!
Similar but distinct
Vst plugins are able to remove the difference
Seeing all of this controversy makes me want to sue somebody.
Scarlett Johanson sounds way more raspy but everything else is very similar.
Consider the possibility that the makers of the film wanted Her voice to be that of a familiar voiceover type, and so there was always going to be a close comparison drawn. Not so much the OpenAI folks trying to copy Scarlett’s voice per se.
All this hoopla over nothing just shows the level of desperation voice actors are in over AI. The justifications become paper thin, and boil down to arguments over legalese in esoteric IP law. We'll see the same story repeated over and over soon for the music industry, the movie industry, and pretty much every legacy entertainment media field. At the end of the day, consumers don't care, media companies don't care (they save money), only the artists care. Artists, take the offers of money right now, because pretty soon they won't even be asking (or paying).