It's technically illegal to pirate a movie or a game. But in practice how many people actually get in trouble for it? Half of millennials would have a criminal record and owe huge civil penalties if it were perfectly enforced.
But is it? If a famous and known personalities voice is used, and suggested that it is his or her opinion it becomes obvious that there is malintent. But we are talking here about cloning a voice of any anonymous person, given they can proceed with the training. Sure professional voice actors likely can produce more training material and be more consistent, but is that the reason you wouldn't be able to buy a generic tool because there are persons that could do a equal or better job without that tool? I honestly don't see why it is a bad to make some carreers commercially speaking redundant. Making the voice over industry something where can be paid for craftmenship and authenticity but also for 'a hammer'.
It’s not them. They aren’t being used. They are in their own world. The voice is a copy of what was once theirs. You don’t own sound. The idea people think they own the sound of their voice as if it’s their words or their thoughts were stolen is insane. There’s even other people that sound a lot like you in this world of billions. What’s wrong is impersonation of identity. Not using a computer voice that tries to use samples of something you once recorded forverer ago that sounds like you is not the same as exploiting you lmao
@@tapetwo7115 But I thought artists were protected - like a musician recording a song. I've read about lawsuits where one artist uses a sampling of another artist's work - even just a snippet - and the court tells them they violated the copyright protection.
TH-cam should outright ban AI voice, it can be detected. So many channels have popped up using AI voice and I personally hate them, there is no expression in the voice.
A few years ago they removed the sound on one of my videos on TikTok saying it was "copyrighted". Um, it was just me. My own voice. I was just talking. No music or anything in the background. Literally, just me talking. How is my voice copyrighted? It's my voice. I appealed it and it got denied. It's the only time it happened. It was weird AF.
@HappysFunPalace No one may have stolen his voice, but that a voice that sounds like his being copyrighted is scary AF. Fighting copyrights in court boils down to who has the most money for legal fees. If someone copyrights a voice that sounds close enough to yours that it gets flagged, you will have limited ability to record your own voice.
"the voice actors have since been removed" almost always seen as an admission of guilt. Hope they get sued for a lot of money because stealing someones voice is far more damaging than stealing a product. They have no control over what scripts their voice is being used with.
While one could say that, in reality if someone is suing you you have to remove their affiliations with you while you're still getting sued. That being said, they explicitely knew that their voices would be used in a voice synthetizer and therefore the VAs might be the ones breaching their contracts
@@AnimatingDreams nope, contracts are very specific on the range in which work can be used, same way software has limitations of use. If it gets resold, modified, or generated for a new product, the contract is broken and legal action can be taken for percentage or entirety of profit.
@@AnimatingDreams No when you're getting sued the smartest thing to do is change absolutely nothing and double down. Reversing your actions implies guilt even if guilt isn't there, that's how people and jury's see it.
@@jtr549well the thing is it’s probably a big company so they’d rather admit guilt quickly and give like 10k compensation or something than have it expand into a larger more costly lawsuit which might be the case here
@@jtr549I asked AI (Poe app) about this scenario. Here is its answer! “When a complaint or lawsuit is filed over the use of copyrighted material, several scenarios can arise regarding whether the company must stop using the material immediately: 1. **Injunctions**: If the plaintiff believes that they are likely to win the case, they may request a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction. If granted by the court, this would require the company to stop using the copyrighted material until a final decision is made. 2. **Immediate Impact**: Until a court rules on the validity of the claim, the company might choose to cease using the material to avoid potential damages or liability. This is often a strategic decision to mitigate risk. 3. **Defenses**: If the company believes it has a strong defense (such as fair use or having the right to use the material), it may continue using the material while contesting the claim. However, this carries risks, as the court could ultimately rule against the company. 4. **Legal Advice**: It is advisable for the company to seek legal counsel to navigate the situation and determine the best course of action based on the specifics of the case. In summary, whether the company must stop using the copyrighted material immediately depends on various factors, including court orders and strategic legal considerations.” - Poe AI
wasn't art copying each other called inspiration? Do you think mathematicians who actually worked on it - got a dime? Currently almost everyone calls themselves "artist" and some art can be really generated.
@@WojciechowskaAnna Using inspiration from other art is a false equivalence to generative AI. A better comparison would be music sampling, which requires copyright and royalties to the original owner. The morphing that generative AI does to input is only partially destructive to the source material (just like music sampling), which means part of the original work is directly used in the output.
@@ElectronicWasteland-p2x you miss the point. Did you ever thought how poor are mathematiciians? Without math used even in bradcasting the mustic - or this discussion -there would be no discussion. Yet nobody pays the money to mathematicians. Artists are very silly believing they are original.
@@WojciechowskaAnna Inspiration for humans sure, this is not human, when you can copy and paste movies its called piracy cause computer can replicate data at massive rates but you can still share your disk with your friend and that's fine. Piracy was also at one point just sharing of data but turns out can be exploited due to scale, same issue here. Its a bit nuanced but you definitely want some protection for jobs and what not.
What is scariest is the fact AI will copy almost anything we do in the future, not only the voice but also the face, gestures, handwriting, whole bodies, manners, feelings...
It's not scary when you put it into a different perspective. For instance, a.i. does not create. a.i. does not have a soul. a.i. is only a tool. And I do have to say it's been used against me personally in the last decade. However, I think solutions are on the way. Gotta stay positive Kids. I Love You, be safe
Remember the screen actors guild strike? This is one of the things that they were fighting for. They wanted fair compensation for the use of their faces and their voices. And Disney refused. I'm still actively boycotting their company, and refuse to watch any movie or any TV show that comes out of or is connected to Disney. Why should I support a company that thinks it's good to steal from their employees?
pretty sure the strike ended with favourable terms for the actors then the guild went ahead and signed contracts giving corpos carte blanche to use AI to copy the actors' likenesses without pay anyway
AI companies have expressed several times that they think they don't have to compensate in any way the original creators of the content they use to train their models. They even say that AI woudn't be profitable if they have to pay copyright and royalties to every intellectual owner.
@@visceratrocarHuman sound alikes in regards to voice acting has actually gotten companies in legal trouble. Can't recall what the cases were, but I know some big name actors have turned down roles, got replaced with mimics in films/shows and then won in court. At least for the US.
@wayIess Human voices can sound incredibly similar naturally. It isn't the voice itself that is the legal issue as you seem to think. It's claiming to be a wealthy person the voice sounds just like. Since AI isn't doing that they aren't doing anything wrong. Claiming a voice alone is the same as a signature is beyond a lie. Voices change over time just like signatures and don't have the static quality of a SSN or other document. That's why you can legally sign with an X but your voice isn't part of your legal identity. Try another one.
@@visceratrocarWealth doesn't grant different protections in regards to voices. That'd be highly illegal to treat Joe Shmo differently than, say Brad Pitt. Cases have gone through court and exist. Unless you want to counter me with instances of the opposite happening and a film studio winning, I don't know what you are arguing. My signature comment was on a different conversation thread, but whatever. Common phone scams, for adults who've gone through puberty (🙄) right now involve stealing sound bite recordings of a target and using their voice to consent. Call an automated helpdesk right now and see how few words it takes to transfer funds from one bank account to another. And God forbid you contest things and your voice perfectly echoes back in recordings. Willful ignorance is truly a sight to behold.
The sad thing is this technology is being developed behind peoples backs. People who are in the industries AI is kicking out, and they're not being included with the development in mind benefiting them. If creatives were a part of the process rather than greedy companies, I feel things would be different. ☹️
Indeed AI is great for people with capital to build/rent/buy datacenters as they can produce endless content/results based on the work of the masses (acting, voice acting, coding, writing, designing, ...) and sell it to us as services. "But we will all get different and better jobs" - says the person who will iron out the last kinks for a few years by tweaking input and evaluating results.
I think you both are being shortsighted; AI products have just arrived into the public domain, it takes a few years for any technology to refine, improve, and produce more. A sole human benefactor of an AI com would theoretically gain the most wealth it produced. But I can envision an AI run government that has no sole benefactor, only equity and benefit to its republic.
@@bbingtube I can imagine that situation as well. But as I stated in another comment here, if we want such an outcome we might have to steer towards such an outcome (have policy to prevent adverse affects on society). I believe in a capitalist system with very little controls the first outcome is more likely to occur before the second.
@@bbingtube they will not let that happen. 2ndly unless an ai tool is on your server not sending back data to its owners, you are always gonna be training their product
I have voice actors that I support and love their works from games to animes and it's truly sad how this new tech particularly AI is being used to exploit them and steal their identity as a talented voice actor. Same goes to digital artists who honed their skills for many years, only to be pitted against AI. I hope that law-making institutions keep on regulating these tech companies and not get corrupted by them.
I'm supporting human voice actors 100%. Human voice belong to human, and human voice works such as narration, voice over and other types of work used by human voice must be done by human voice, it's absolutely their rights (in context). AI have no right to occupy and use human voice for voice works, even IT can do that. And to be more clear, this is not about two humans have similar voices, that'd be a difference case (me and my brother have almost the same voice, but we don't work in voice acting). Those companies that using AI voice generators for voice works should be sued to bankrupt.
What about 2D artists-does AI have the right to generate images? Or for VFX artists-does AI have the right to create visual effects? How about 3D artists-can AI make 3D models? And writers-does AI have the right to write? You see, people argue that AI shouldn't clone human voices because they come from humans, but all these other skills come from humans too, and people are losing their jobs because of it. In my opinion, you can't stop AI from doing what it's doing, and it's absolutely ridiculous and illogical to try. They could hire someone and get permission to use their voice for text-to-speech (TTS)-are you saying that would also be illegal because it's a human voice? The CEO of this company is an absolute fool. They could have easily made a contract with a voice-over artist, letting them know it’s for TTS, and avoided any issues.
@@MetarigThe problem for most of us is less that AI exists, and more that it is thieving. people are getting their voices, their art, their work put into these without consent and that ISNT okay, people have lost JOBS because their employees would take their work and shove it into their own AI and then let them go. TTS is not remotely the same as an AI voice that can perfectly 1:1 mimic someone off of a few audio samples, TTS is consensual and mixed and cut down into pieces, AI voices are not. A lot of people think AI in things like healthcare can be helpful (not like insurance AI which is happening) or certain things, but not AI that takes away from creative spaces and forces people into miserable jobs that no one wants to do in the first place. Not to mention i'd prefer limited AI anyway because the same environmental impact it has as NFTs does.
@@Nature-t4rYou act as if you wouldn't be disturbed if you heard your voice being used to promote something you never agreed to or used as a product where you didnt consent to do so.
@@Felix-jo7nj People need to stop complaining about things they can't control. It's going to happen regardless, and complaining won't change anything. For example, let's say you managed to slow down or limit AI development. All you're doing is delaying the inevitable. It's like saying calculators took the jobs of mathematicians. Sure, people used to pay for calculations, but now machines can do it. However, mathematicians created the rules, and the machines are just using them. It's absurd to say AI is stealing creativity. If your job is affected by AI, you need to adapt and find a new one instead of complaining. As a CGI artist, AI is impacting my field too, but I'm adjusting. You need to stop whining and act like adults. Once you let go of the complaints, you'll have the mindset to adapt and move forward, doing something to save your future.
This is what happens when technology precedes the laws that govern it. BY the time the law catches up, it's too late to reign in the tech. This is nothing new and will only get worse, especially with AI which will dramatically change how the world operates. The public has access, the corporations have access, and if it can make money it will be used exploitatively. The concept of individuality will blur as AI replicates how we look, talk, move, etc. Welcome to the future. Good luck fighting it.
@@Angelaava-jd3vd This is where blockchain technology is going to come in handy, and become common place I think. We are going to reach a point where things will have to be solidly verified
This is not anymore an issue of stealing intellectual property. This is identity theft. Criminals can pretend to be you by using your voice to “confirm” monetary transactions. This, in my opinion, must be regulated.
@visceratrocar im sorry, what??? Stealing someone's voice ISN'T identity theft to you? As the person above just said, it can be used to confirm transactions. But also you have trump as an icon, so you're probably braindead anyway 😂
@@visceratrocarYour voice is part of your personal information and self identifier. There's several security levels, but even so that's a layer of identify theft. It's not much different from a signature forgery when several companies nowadays will take verbal confirmation as the same thing.
@@visceratrocar the fact that you choose not to see how one can bleed into the other is baffling. If I can make a phone call with your voice and say whatever I want, that's identity theft.
I hope that these voice actors win bigger than big - so big that no tech companies ever try to do this again. Problem is, it's likely that these companies eventually will be able to 'grab' electronic recordings of voices and alter them enough such that the voices will be distinguishable from the originals. I really hate this AI cloning sh*t.
Nope they ain't wining, just look at the voice sounds very different then original. They have given their audio for training research and the audio which they presented as evidence is a lot different, almost as if it's a different person.
@@DellikkilleDMovie & film studios can actually get in big trouble for purposely seeking voice impersonators when the actual actor they wanted turned down the role.
@@mho... no, it isn’t. It’s like suing car manufacturers because they took the hooves off of YOUR horse to make their new car. I think we can agree that’s fair.
@@mho... it's like suing those people that make red, sleak, mean sports cars that look a lot like a Ferrari, sound like a Ferrari, but claim it's just something they trained themselves to do by seeing what's around.
It starts with voices, then faces. Acting, voice over, script writing, copy writing, graphics design, logo design to soon become extinct. I know countless production houses now using AI voices for all their voice overs on jobs and an agency that generates client logos all with AI. Even former clients are generating their own art, imagery and marketing content inhouse now, negating the need for a real 'qualified and trained' person.
It won’t be extinct. Half the time people who hire artists don’t know what they want, let alone how to articulate that to an AI that only does what you tell them. Artists will always be important to have. They have personal insights on what the client might actually want.
I believe Lovo stole Grover Gardner's voice too... I heard it on this video. He has narrated many of Lois McMaster Bujold's audiobooks. Wish I knew how to tell him.
@@R1ch4rd "hat's how the world we live in is, buddy." Ignoring the fact that this was the rules made by rich people yet the working class loves spewing this logic to make it seems we can't do anything about it. "YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU TOLERATE" hence why we should not allow them with this kind of actions, buddy.
Not really. AI is limited to its programming. You obviously don't know how AI works. It isn't scifi AI where it's completely autonomous and indistinguishable from a real human. That will never happen.
@@visceratrocarBut companies and tech enthusiasts WANT ai to perfectly mirror people and be indistinguishable. They're the ones spearheading the advancements and fine tunings. I mean, visual ai programs were getting laughed at for janky fingers and hands. Nowadays their programmers brag about how that's no longer an issue. It's a constant battle and if you think you can notice every single ai forgery imperfection, that's really foolhardy and short sighted. Not to mention it's exhausting to stop and analyze everything we see day to day.
There should be a law about AI replacing human job. If this continue the unemployed will skyrocket. No job = No money = No Food/House= More homeless = ☠️
Many governments are already testing out giving people a basic wage. I listened to a yt video about it recently. They expect that most people will be out of work in the future and believe they will all be given a basic wage.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ). The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people. And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ). The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people. And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ). The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people. And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ). The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people. And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ). The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people. And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
AI has been used by scientists for over a decade already. One obvious application is supercomputing to generate models of gravitational forces. You're speaking in ignorance.
Come to Jesus, He saves us from the horros to come and He saves us from hell if we let Him - if we trust in Him and what He did and surrender our lives to Him.
why would it be? you dont own the sound of your voice anymore then you own your image. anyone can take a picture of you and sell it, or use it for financial gain. this is the same.
@@DellikkilleD Its illegal in lots of places if you are taking a photo/video of someone without them knowing or asking you for permission, and you can be sued/charged if the person wants that.
AI should be helping humans, not stealing their talents or abilities or replacing them. SAG-AFTRA strikes last year suppress production and film development studios of having AI added in their works/masterpieces.
"AI will replace how I fold my laundry or prepare my food..." Which, in a hindsight, are also JOBS by certain people. So in a sense, she's basically saying, "AI can replace other people's jobs but not mine"
I was in discussions to use my voice with Eleven Labs. They were so unorganized that it took 10 months to get to a point where they went in a different direction. I have no confidence in the company personnel but their tech is good.
its been removed from there site, but there was a TTS company selling my 11 year old daughters voice, from what i learned, they were just going through youtube channels with kids and cloning voices they thought sounded "impactful"
how the hell did they even get ur daughter's voice 😭 creepy ngl sorry that happened, AI bros are WILD they will do anything just to get stuff to feed to their pet AI.
Yikes! Yeah, a few weeks ago several TH-camrs were talking about their content getting scrubbed for ai. I didn't even think about the children involved. Glad it got removed, but to think other kids are getting the same treatment. Scummy and scary. 😬
It's not Artificial Intelligence who decided to record and steal these voices, it was a human CEO and a team of engineers. People stealing from other people.
@@visceratrocar ah yes, outraged to get compensation for work done. Something your pfp has in common with his workers. Lack of paying others for their work as designated in contracts.
This is why youtube should not allow any content that uses more than 80% synthetic voices because youtube allowing it significantly contributes to the growing demand for synthetic voice usage in content creation. which motivates these thieves to clone other people's voices without permission.
😢😢😢😢 I was once asked to record "test VO" for a Latina character and then received a contract which stated that I had to give up my rights over MY VOICE and let them use it any way they wanted. I did not sign, but I don't know if this test was enough for them to try to synthesize human emotions
I honestly don’t know which is worse. Imagine hearing a dead relative out of the blue but they’re just advertising something to you 😭 That would be so upsetting. But also imagine living your life knowing your voice has been stolen and used for things you’d never have agreed to… It’s all horrible
OpenAI's advanced voice can emulate anyone's voice, once you know how to persuade it. so it's obvious it has studied on every media available. There is huge theft, and only the company is profiting. Udio has also done this with music. it's very obvious, but the law hasn't really caught up to stop this. There are laws preventing us from impersonating in some states, but those people's voices are pretty common and not distinct enough to sue back.
Impersonation is usually protected speech. Unless you're impersonating someone with authority or a doctor. Celebrity impersonation in particular is the most ancient form of cosplay. By your logic Halloween costumes need to be banned.
What's sad is that there would have likely been plenty of people excited about the tech and willing to let their voice be cloned. Instead, they insisted on tricking them.
It's time to move away from IP laws. Your identity should be you, not a video or an audio recording. I don't want to have to defend my identity with layers upon layers of lawyers and lawsuits.
“we didn’t think AI is gonna replace human being’s creative endeavors” this is exactly it! AI should be improving scientific research, not replacing creatives because a company doesn’t want to pay a full wage to an actual human being!
There is a place for this is the disabled community for those whose speech will go away like with ALS, but this is straight ripping off a huge part of these folks identities 😮
Good point and with those speech boards the person is consenting to and knows exactly how their voice will be used. A friend of mine recorded her voice for her sister's board since they sounded really similar.
@visceratrocar I said the exact opposite. Did you even watch the video? This tech can allow them to capture their own voice to use in the future as to NOT sound like Stephen Hawkins, but exactly like themselves. This shows how realistic AI voices are sounding these days and how ai now can generate an entire vocabulary from a few random sentences spoken. I brought up ALS because people know what's coming. It's usually a later in life diagnosis, and they start to lose muscle control, but the voice usually isn't the first thing to go, but it will go.
@@heatherkaye8653 Yes I did. AI voice cloning will never sound identical to humans because computers lack human nuance. It's the same as a guitar player copying others before him. We all know Eddie Van Halen's style but no one bats an eye when they hear it in someone else's song. Same applies here.
@@visceratrocar None of the voices for the speech boards sound like Stephen Hawking anymore. Actually his was a really early version that was discontinued years and years ago. The new ones are a person gets recorded saying several sentences. If they catch it in time then the person could use their own voice. In the case of my friends they were identical twins and sounded pretty much the same so it was close to her own voice. It's the same technology as being discussed here. The original commenter was mentioning a good and ethical use for this technology and really the only one I can think of that's appropriate is to use AI for medical use. There needs to be laws so people can't use other people's voices without their consent for commercial gain. That is unethical.
There’s a big voice actor selling her courses saying the scene is thriving and people shouldn’t stop investing in this career because AI will never take away people’s jobs in this industry. She is literally selling courses knowing damn well it’s an endangered job. Every time someone says so people say they are “haters”.
Lots of TH-cam creators are having their video content scraped _without permission_ to create AI versions of their voices... I've reported 3 channels just in the last month for entirely AI-generated content with an AI voiceover mimicking _3 different_ creators I'm familiar with. I've also heard ads on TH-cam doing the same thing with relatively small content creators, probably figuring they'll be less likely to notice their vocal likeness has been stolen. And the fact that YT has added _"impersonation"_ as one of reporting categories says a lot. I'll be watching this lawsuit with interest, because I have significant concerns about companies like this facilitating crimes like scams, fraud, extortion, etc. and having zero scruples about it. Given we use our voices for verification, stealing someone's vocal signature without permission should be treated as identity theft.
What caught me is how they said they expected AI to “make dinner” and “do my laundry”, which are, as far as I know, also human jobs which is why we have restaurants and laundromats, respectively - or heck, maids if we’re going for manual labor Suddenly their job being stolen is suddenly injustice lol
Generative AI makes me so angry. There needs to be regulations and restrictions, and heavy ones. We needed that yesterday, I'm tired of waiting while nasty people use it to break everything.
@@visceratrocar Okay, 2 things. 1. Nobody ever, literally nobody said AI invented theft 2. Nobody said it's okay when humans do it, that's just as awful, and GenAI goes hand-in-hand with theft in that way. They are both rotten, GenAI is just the new version of it.
@@sunla AI is run by humans. So humans are behind it, not AI by itself as you imply. AI is not autonomous and never will be. So everything you're claiming is a delusion. Sorry to break it to you but you aren't that important and no one here is taking you seriously. Scifi is not reality. Though AI is the reason we have a lot of technologies that have been developed in the last decade or so. God forbid you even look up how it's been a part of you life without you ever knowing it. And guess what? The same programming that allowed AI to innovate for us is the same programming that creates art. Again, Google it. Maybe next post you won't humiliate yourself again.
@@Irobert1115HDI mean when an individual wants to use a vocaloid voicebank, they’ll pay for it in order to make whatever they want whether it be shitposts, voice lines, or songs But it’s still going strong
@ she does actually, I found that out when my brother, who is a massive Miku fan, recognized the voice while we were watching Gundam Build Fighters Try (where she voices Shia Kijima) Her name is Saki Fujita, and she provided the voice for Hatsune Miku, and has appeared in several other series like Pretty Cure and Cardcaptor Recently, she’s the one playing Koshitan in My Deer Friend
This absolutely makes sense! AI does not have it's own voice, it has to be given a voice but companies are not allowed to simply steal or copy someone's voice. Sue for a fortune.
This must 🛑. It’s indeed NOT innovation, it’s exploitation! A voice, a creation or an innovation. It all must be protected and not be used (or abused) without rights to do so! I also work as a voice actor and actor and to steal not what I have created, but stealing ME… makes me discussed!
This is shady business, this is why i dont talk in my Solo game devlog videos :( Voice artist deserves to get paid same as actors music maker,etc business that is doing this sort of stuff is youst bad and not honest business. great video
I've been really worried about voice copying like this. People are getting their voices copied through a phone call. I try and make sure that I use as few words as possible and never say Yes to any kind of weird phone call. For example, you get an an innocent call asking some survey questions about your home market value or something. Then you get a huge charge because some company got ahold of your credit card info or bank details and made an copy of your voice agreeing to the purchase, should you try and fight back. I use this as an example because it has happened. It's also happening to seniors who get phone calls from supposed kids or grandkids asking for help or money, using AI copies of their voices. It is not just voice actors who are at risk. Everyone is at risk.
As a user of AI. I agree. It supposed to be Innovative, not hurting others. But thats the problem with humans. They will use it to harm. And maybe it should be banned, if programmers can't do a simple task as not taking away someone's Identity, and their livelihood. AI is meant to put yourself together to show the world what you have to offer so you can have fancy equipment in the long run so you don't need A.I. Thats my opinion.
AI is cheap they don't need eat or sleep that why they become highly demanding work force in many company, but be careful they may one day don't need you (AKA CEO get fired by AI when they taking over your company.) VA industry hard to get out situation with development of AI and freelancing industry, once their record voice out there is no way knowing their work not be stolen, since what come in into internet and computer never truly gone AI can retrieved files where human can't reach.
AI is actually high maintenence. Ever wonder where the data is stored for it? In huge servers. That need human programmers to repair like any other computer system. AI isn't taking jobs away. It's shifting the focus of the jobs we already have.
So many jobs became obsolete in a single year.. Artists, voice artists, designers, photoshop artists, editors, customer service etc.. Sad to see so many people go jobless, we always thought it would go hand in hand but companies have straight away ditched people... 😢
Some of you never had your name a tv show, and the effects of it. And it shows. Millions of "fans" associating a story and name.. with a false persona.. And seeing online.. as building your business.. and seeing the comments of brainwashed people.. Nah. Not happy. Idk whats up with these media companies. Theyre not responding.
Not to mention how it affected personal relationships.. networking, job prospects.. IDC if it's entertainment or literature made film.. it's an issue. It's identity theft.
At least one of Lovo's voices is so familiar that the original voice is devalued because it's totally associated with AI now. There's no way to undo the damage Lovo did. Imagine being a voice actor and no one wants to hire you because you "sound like an AI".
My husband is a landscape designer. He does 3Ds to show clients how their backyard, patio, flower beds would look. Ai can now build a whole 3D of the clientes house/property… with mistakes but faster than a human. It’s sad; good thing is my husband is still a lot more skilled than AI and he works for Amish… so his job is secured.
I've said before that was need a line in the sand. No contract signed before some date can constitute a right use us a copyrightable work for AI training data and no contract after that date can be used for training data without explicitly mentioning that fact.
@@potoo6122I can say the same about your lack of basic punctuation, however hundreds of millions of people a day use it. Why do you think ketamine musk uses it to throw a tantrum on?
@Jackielong-sighted7890 do you spend all your time correcting everyones grammar on Twitter, too. Cant be much fun when you are long sighted either. Clown. Ha ha 😂
@@Jackielong-sighted7890 I hardly find the connection between the expression of the phrase "who uses", the fact that you are not familiar with this hyperbole is ironic, that you care about basic punctuations. But yes a lot of people still uses it.
lol. it sounds like massive compensation is in order. The voice actors still own the copyright the as the music industry has set precedence in dealing with copyrighted material.
That's what AI companies do. They scrape everything as a non profit research. Then make the data freely available to the company that was behind the "research" the whole time. Then the company profits from it. Thats the loophole.
VA's need to start putting/demanding to be stated on their contracts that their work won't be used in any way, shape or form to train any Artificial Intelligence / Machine Learning model, be it for internal or external use. It's not ideal but at least you get some protection.
As a creator this is the time for you to legally protect your work. Art, music, writers, and filmmakers all need to take the legal steps to protect your work before it's released. unfortunately sharing behind the scenes work before something is released leaves a big risk. These Ai programs comb the internet and take what they want.
yeah famously cleaning people love their jobs and also don't need to clean or cook for themselves so wouldn't possibly benefit from automation, unlike actors who of course are going to benefit in any way shape or form from people making explicit deepfakes of them and using politicians' likeness and voice for fake news (this is vital for humanity's progression)
Bad comparison, as chefs are creative. Cooks simply follow recipes, which anyone who cooks at home also does, and the two groups have been competing in their own way for a long time now. Many people won't justify paying someone else to cook what they are able to, but a chef is a different beast. And maids are already a niche market, as most people can't afford them anyway. Doing chores is literally taught to children to make the home more efficient, but is that an FU to maids and cleaning people? Even better, do the maids hire maids, and do cleaning crews hire cleaning crews?
@@euthanasia9930 Do maids have no interest in using a laundromat where AI assist in folding clothing after, or a roomba to work on the floor while they address other details in the house? Cleaning correctly is a pretty complicated task, even for the most futuristic AI. A maid these days is far more valuable for childcare than mere cleaning, with transferable skills and task fulfilment an AI shouldn't be used for (at least not if someone actually cares about their child's development). Can a chef not work ALONGSIDE an AI, to help make their work more efficient while still being relevant in the workforce, unlike the case with a voice actor who - once their voice has been used for a voice bank - gets thrown out because their work is considered done? Is it not more dangerous for the common population - regardless of profession - that we continue to allow unauthorized use of someone else's voice to be legal? A chef AI can be taught and directed on how not to give someone food poisoning and not get the people it's working for handed a lawsuit. A voice generating AI just does what it's told with no interest in human safety - it doesn't matter to it if that voice will be used for blackmail, deepfakes, court "evidence" or so on...
@@sapiescentsome of them do love their jobs and make generational wealth from that kind of work. You're such an elitist and a subconscious racist too considering the demographic differences between the average cook or maid.
@@cobra4455Can you at least learn what "elitist" and "racist" actually mean before accusing people of being that? The demographic differences are that upper class people have been exploiting the lower class in backbreaking work for hundreds of years and now AI is making it so they can in theory exploit a machine instead of a living breathing person. "Some" of them loving their jobs will still have jobs - from the people who don't trust said machines. For those made redundant, their skills are also easier to transfer to other lines of work. For creatives already in a struggling market, almost all of which chose their line of work precisely because they wanted to do what they love and still have money to survive, it's another story. This includes people struggling financially who were able to get by through online commissions. When they ask where they're supposed to go from here, they're told to "get a real job" as if you can magically get one without paying a hefty sum for a degree, as if a relative will simply hand them one, as though their "real" job would be any safer. As though we would not all benefit from preventing the consequences that come with generative AI (replacing creative output and making us doubt eachother's authenticity more than ever before) over AI designed to perform manual labour (increased industrial efficiency).
So when you pirate a game or a movie it is illegal, but giant corporations are allowed to this with little to no consequences?
Correct. When you steal from them it’s theft. When they steal from you, it’s “innovation”
This is not a giant corporation, but that doesn’t make it right.
"Rules for thee, but not for me."
It's technically illegal to pirate a movie or a game. But in practice how many people actually get in trouble for it? Half of millennials would have a criminal record and owe huge civil penalties if it were perfectly enforced.
@@brandonsteele2826lol true. I only have a career doing what I do because of pirated software
"It's not innovation, it's exploitation." That's my favourite line from the interview. Totally agree.
But is it? If a famous and known personalities voice is used, and suggested that it is his or her opinion it becomes obvious that there is malintent. But we are talking here about cloning a voice of any anonymous person, given they can proceed with the training. Sure professional voice actors likely can produce more training material and be more consistent, but is that the reason you wouldn't be able to buy a generic tool because there are persons that could do a equal or better job without that tool? I honestly don't see why it is a bad to make some carreers commercially speaking redundant. Making the voice over industry something where can be paid for craftmenship and authenticity but also for 'a hammer'.
@@skinkie There's really no point in what you're saying.
It’s not them. They aren’t being used. They are in their own world. The voice is a copy of what was once theirs. You don’t own sound. The idea people think they own the sound of their voice as if it’s their words or their thoughts were stolen is insane. There’s even other people that sound a lot like you in this world of billions. What’s wrong is impersonation of identity. Not using a computer voice that tries to use samples of something you once recorded forverer ago that sounds like you is not the same as exploiting you lmao
@@tapetwo7115 But I thought artists were protected - like a musician recording a song. I've read about lawsuits where one artist uses a sampling of another artist's work - even just a snippet - and the court tells them they violated the copyright protection.
Cry more loser.
I heard "David Attenborough" advertising dodgy financial products on TH-cam about 6 months ago.
Lol joe rogan and Mr. Beast keep trying to get me to buy crypto
@@sandydancer187 Mr Beast is probably real
😂fr@@PAINt0theMAX
TH-cam should outright ban AI voice, it can be detected. So many channels have popped up using AI voice and I personally hate them, there is no expression in the voice.
@BrianGreene-rn9uz so when they do have tone?
A few years ago they removed the sound on one of my videos on TikTok saying it was "copyrighted". Um, it was just me. My own voice. I was just talking. No music or anything in the background. Literally, just me talking. How is my voice copyrighted? It's my voice. I appealed it and it got denied. It's the only time it happened. It was weird AF.
Makes you think has your voice been stolen and used for AI?!
@anakinjmanu It probably has, we now have to copyright ourselves to prevent these things from happening?
why would anyone steal your voice though?
@@HappysFunPalacefor nefarious purposes
@HappysFunPalace No one may have stolen his voice, but that a voice that sounds like his being copyrighted is scary AF. Fighting copyrights in court boils down to who has the most money for legal fees. If someone copyrights a voice that sounds close enough to yours that it gets flagged, you will have limited ability to record your own voice.
"the voice actors have since been removed" almost always seen as an admission of guilt. Hope they get sued for a lot of money because stealing someones voice is far more damaging than stealing a product. They have no control over what scripts their voice is being used with.
While one could say that, in reality if someone is suing you you have to remove their affiliations with you while you're still getting sued. That being said, they explicitely knew that their voices would be used in a voice synthetizer and therefore the VAs might be the ones breaching their contracts
@@AnimatingDreams nope, contracts are very specific on the range in which work can be used, same way software has limitations of use. If it gets resold, modified, or generated for a new product, the contract is broken and legal action can be taken for percentage or entirety of profit.
@@AnimatingDreams No when you're getting sued the smartest thing to do is change absolutely nothing and double down. Reversing your actions implies guilt even if guilt isn't there, that's how people and jury's see it.
@@jtr549well the thing is it’s probably a big company so they’d rather admit guilt quickly and give like 10k compensation or something than have it expand into a larger more costly lawsuit which might be the case here
@@jtr549I asked AI (Poe app) about this scenario. Here is its answer!
“When a complaint or lawsuit is filed over the use of copyrighted material, several scenarios can arise regarding whether the company must stop using the material immediately:
1. **Injunctions**: If the plaintiff believes that they are likely to win the case, they may request a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction. If granted by the court, this would require the company to stop using the copyrighted material until a final decision is made.
2. **Immediate Impact**: Until a court rules on the validity of the claim, the company might choose to cease using the material to avoid potential damages or liability. This is often a strategic decision to mitigate risk.
3. **Defenses**: If the company believes it has a strong defense (such as fair use or having the right to use the material), it may continue using the material while contesting the claim. However, this carries risks, as the court could ultimately rule against the company.
4. **Legal Advice**: It is advisable for the company to seek legal counsel to navigate the situation and determine the best course of action based on the specifics of the case.
In summary, whether the company must stop using the copyrighted material immediately depends on various factors, including court orders and strategic legal considerations.” - Poe AI
In its current form, generative AI is mostly theft, and should be treated as such. These tech companies need to be held accountable.
wasn't art copying each other called inspiration? Do you think mathematicians who actually worked on it - got a dime? Currently almost everyone calls themselves "artist" and some art can be really generated.
@@WojciechowskaAnna Using inspiration from other art is a false equivalence to generative AI. A better comparison would be music sampling, which requires copyright and royalties to the original owner. The morphing that generative AI does to input is only partially destructive to the source material (just like music sampling), which means part of the original work is directly used in the output.
@@ElectronicWasteland-p2x you miss the point. Did you ever thought how poor are mathematiciians? Without math used even in bradcasting the mustic - or this discussion -there would be no discussion. Yet nobody pays the money to mathematicians. Artists are very silly believing they are original.
@@WojciechowskaAnna Your argument makes no sense, and your spelling/grammar is horrendous.
@@WojciechowskaAnna Inspiration for humans sure, this is not human, when you can copy and paste movies its called piracy cause computer can replicate data at massive rates but you can still share your disk with your friend and that's fine. Piracy was also at one point just sharing of data but turns out can be exploited due to scale, same issue here. Its a bit nuanced but you definitely want some protection for jobs and what not.
What is scariest is the fact AI will copy almost anything we do in the future, not only the voice but also the face, gestures, handwriting, whole bodies, manners, feelings...
Thats ok as long it helps make humanity progress and abundant someday. Don't be a selfish thinking
It's not scary when you put it into a different perspective.
For instance, a.i. does not create.
a.i. does not have a soul.
a.i. is only a tool.
And I do have to say it's been used against me personally in the last decade.
However, I think solutions are on the way. Gotta stay positive Kids.
I Love You, be safe
But not the ability to do chores
@@yatsumleung8618 - yes, some of them.
@@rachael5178its scary even not have a soul. Is the nuclear bomb have a soul? It's scary
Remember the screen actors guild strike? This is one of the things that they were fighting for. They wanted fair compensation for the use of their faces and their voices. And Disney refused. I'm still actively boycotting their company, and refuse to watch any movie or any TV show that comes out of or is connected to Disney. Why should I support a company that thinks it's good to steal from their employees?
No one cares. Sadly, that's the reality of this world and no one would be held accountable.
I'm sure they are really missing your $9.99 a month.....
@@cqpzgEveryone thought the same thing about Bud Light and now it’s not even in the top 2.
pretty sure the strike ended with favourable terms for the actors then the guild went ahead and signed contracts giving corpos carte blanche to use AI to copy the actors' likenesses without pay anyway
@@cqpzg this has nothing to do with Disney and everything to do with the consumer not wanting to support it.
AI companies have expressed several times that they think they don't have to compensate in any way the original creators of the content they use to train their models. They even say that AI woudn't be profitable if they have to pay copyright and royalties to every intellectual owner.
Kind of like...human soundalikes? Which is a borderline ancient arguement?
There is legal ways to do this, but they don't want to pay and write contracts
@@visceratrocarHuman sound alikes in regards to voice acting has actually gotten companies in legal trouble. Can't recall what the cases were, but I know some big name actors have turned down roles, got replaced with mimics in films/shows and then won in court.
At least for the US.
@wayIess Human voices can sound incredibly similar naturally. It isn't the voice itself that is the legal issue as you seem to think. It's claiming to be a wealthy person the voice sounds just like. Since AI isn't doing that they aren't doing anything wrong. Claiming a voice alone is the same as a signature is beyond a lie. Voices change over time just like signatures and don't have the static quality of a SSN or other document. That's why you can legally sign with an X but your voice isn't part of your legal identity. Try another one.
@@visceratrocarWealth doesn't grant different protections in regards to voices. That'd be highly illegal to treat Joe Shmo differently than, say Brad Pitt.
Cases have gone through court and exist. Unless you want to counter me with instances of the opposite happening and a film studio winning, I don't know what you are arguing.
My signature comment was on a different conversation thread, but whatever. Common phone scams, for adults who've gone through puberty (🙄) right now involve stealing sound bite recordings of a target and using their voice to consent. Call an automated helpdesk right now and see how few words it takes to transfer funds from one bank account to another. And God forbid you contest things and your voice perfectly echoes back in recordings.
Willful ignorance is truly a sight to behold.
That last line - "it isn't innovation, it is exploitation." - this is exactly that!
The sad thing is this technology is being developed behind peoples backs. People who are in the industries AI is kicking out, and they're not being included with the development in mind benefiting them.
If creatives were a part of the process rather than greedy companies, I feel things would be different. ☹️
yeah its rich people who wanna keep their high paying job and take away poor people jobs lmao
@@AK255. Maybe they should learn to mine coal
except the claim is false. it's exploiting data, not you.
See how they never make AI CEOs. They don't want computers taking those jobs. Just the jobs they have to pay other people for
Indeed AI is great for people with capital to build/rent/buy datacenters as they can produce endless content/results based on the work of the masses (acting, voice acting, coding, writing, designing, ...) and sell it to us as services. "But we will all get different and better jobs" - says the person who will iron out the last kinks for a few years by tweaking input and evaluating results.
I think you both are being shortsighted; AI products have just arrived into the public domain, it takes a few years for any technology to refine, improve, and produce more. A sole human benefactor of an AI com would theoretically gain the most wealth it produced. But I can envision an AI run government that has no sole benefactor, only equity and benefit to its republic.
@@bbingtube I can imagine that situation as well. But as I stated in another comment here, if we want such an outcome we might have to steer towards such an outcome (have policy to prevent adverse affects on society). I believe in a capitalist system with very little controls the first outcome is more likely to occur before the second.
@@bbingtube science fiction goes crazy
@@bbingtube they will not let that happen. 2ndly unless an ai tool is on your server not sending back data to its owners, you are always gonna be training their product
I have voice actors that I support and love their works from games to animes and it's truly sad how this new tech particularly AI is being used to exploit them and steal their identity as a talented voice actor. Same goes to digital artists who honed their skills for many years, only to be pitted against AI. I hope that law-making institutions keep on regulating these tech companies and not get corrupted by them.
I'm supporting human voice actors 100%. Human voice belong to human, and human voice works such as narration, voice over and other types of work used by human voice must be done by human voice, it's absolutely their rights (in context). AI have no right to occupy and use human voice for voice works, even IT can do that. And to be more clear, this is not about two humans have similar voices, that'd be a difference case (me and my brother have almost the same voice, but we don't work in voice acting). Those companies that using AI voice generators for voice works should be sued to bankrupt.
What about 2D artists-does AI have the right to generate images? Or for VFX artists-does AI have the right to create visual effects? How about 3D artists-can AI make 3D models? And writers-does AI have the right to write? You see, people argue that AI shouldn't clone human voices because they come from humans, but all these other skills come from humans too, and people are losing their jobs because of it. In my opinion, you can't stop AI from doing what it's doing, and it's absolutely ridiculous and illogical to try. They could hire someone and get permission to use their voice for text-to-speech (TTS)-are you saying that would also be illegal because it's a human voice? The CEO of this company is an absolute fool. They could have easily made a contract with a voice-over artist, letting them know it’s for TTS, and avoided any issues.
How can you prohibit the synthesis of the human voice, it just a parameters and number.
@@MetarigThe problem for most of us is less that AI exists, and more that it is thieving. people are getting their voices, their art, their work put into these without consent and that ISNT okay, people have lost JOBS because their employees would take their work and shove it into their own AI and then let them go. TTS is not remotely the same as an AI voice that can perfectly 1:1 mimic someone off of a few audio samples, TTS is consensual and mixed and cut down into pieces, AI voices are not. A lot of people think AI in things like healthcare can be helpful (not like insurance AI which is happening) or certain things, but not AI that takes away from creative spaces and forces people into miserable jobs that no one wants to do in the first place.
Not to mention i'd prefer limited AI anyway because the same environmental impact it has as NFTs does.
@@Nature-t4rYou act as if you wouldn't be disturbed if you heard your voice being used to promote something you never agreed to or used as a product where you didnt consent to do so.
@@Felix-jo7nj People need to stop complaining about things they can't control. It's going to happen regardless, and complaining won't change anything. For example, let's say you managed to slow down or limit AI development. All you're doing is delaying the inevitable. It's like saying calculators took the jobs of mathematicians. Sure, people used to pay for calculations, but now machines can do it. However, mathematicians created the rules, and the machines are just using them. It's absurd to say AI is stealing creativity. If your job is affected by AI, you need to adapt and find a new one instead of complaining. As a CGI artist, AI is impacting my field too, but I'm adjusting. You need to stop whining and act like adults. Once you let go of the complaints, you'll have the mindset to adapt and move forward, doing something to save your future.
This is what happens when technology precedes the laws that govern it. BY the time the law catches up, it's too late to reign in the tech. This is nothing new and will only get worse, especially with AI which will dramatically change how the world operates. The public has access, the corporations have access, and if it can make money it will be used exploitatively. The concept of individuality will blur as AI replicates how we look, talk, move, etc. Welcome to the future. Good luck fighting it.
No, technology isn't preceding the law. The companies just break the law
Everyone's voice and digital likeness is their unique ID and should be protected, especially against others using it and profiting from it
@@Angelaava-jd3vd This is where blockchain technology is going to come in handy, and become common place I think. We are going to reach a point where things will have to be solidly verified
That's kind of how laws work. Legislation is reactive, not predictive.
They're breaking a law that's been around for literally 48 years.
This is not anymore an issue of stealing intellectual property. This is identity theft. Criminals can pretend to be you by using your voice to “confirm” monetary transactions. This, in my opinion, must be regulated.
No, Identity theft involves bank accounts and personal information. Don't conflate the two.
@visceratrocar im sorry, what??? Stealing someone's voice ISN'T identity theft to you? As the person above just said, it can be used to confirm transactions. But also you have trump as an icon, so you're probably braindead anyway 😂
your opinion is as worthless as your education clearly was. You dont own what you sound like ffs.
@@visceratrocarYour voice is part of your personal information and self identifier. There's several security levels, but even so that's a layer of identify theft.
It's not much different from a signature forgery when several companies nowadays will take verbal confirmation as the same thing.
@@visceratrocar the fact that you choose not to see how one can bleed into the other is baffling. If I can make a phone call with your voice and say whatever I want, that's identity theft.
I hope that these voice actors win bigger than big - so big that no tech companies ever try to do this again. Problem is, it's likely that these companies eventually will be able to 'grab' electronic recordings of voices and alter them enough such that the voices will be distinguishable from the originals. I really hate this AI cloning sh*t.
Nope they ain't wining, just look at the voice sounds very different then original. They have given their audio for training research and the audio which they presented as evidence is a lot different, almost as if it's a different person.
It's very hard to win big, the chances of them winning big on this unknown field gives the chances for the big company to defend themselves big.
they wont, they have no ground to stand on. you dont own the sound of your voice. impersonators have been doing the same thing for generations.
@@DellikkilleDMovie & film studios can actually get in big trouble for purposely seeking voice impersonators when the actual actor they wanted turned down the role.
@@wayIess lmfao no they dont
Yeah, AI stealing jobs with talent is disgusting, especially creative jobs.
It’s also making life easier for us.
@@emptyhad2571How ?
@@Soum9765 The "us" they are referring to is thieves.
@@emptyhad2571 How is paying for these AI making life easier for us?
@@ethankreider6927 Few examples: Siri, search bar and Chat-gpt
I don’t understand how AI is allowed to just run around stealing stuff with no consequences. It’s not legal, yet no one seems to care. 😞
AI isn’t stealing stuff, it’s people who are training AI that are doing the stealing.
thats like suing car maufacturers, because horses went out of fashion.....
@@mho... no, it isn’t. It’s like suing car manufacturers because they took the hooves off of YOUR horse to make their new car. I think we can agree that’s fair.
@@mho... it's like suing those people that make red, sleak, mean sports cars that look a lot like a Ferrari, sound like a Ferrari, but claim it's just something they trained themselves to do by seeing what's around.
@@RR-ds4sdreminder that Lamborghini existed to spite Ferrari lol
It starts with voices, then faces. Acting, voice over, script writing, copy writing, graphics design, logo design to soon become extinct. I know countless production houses now using AI voices for all their voice overs on jobs and an agency that generates client logos all with AI. Even former clients are generating their own art, imagery and marketing content inhouse now, negating the need for a real 'qualified and trained' person.
It won’t be extinct. Half the time people who hire artists don’t know what they want, let alone how to articulate that to an AI that only does what you tell them. Artists will always be important to have. They have personal insights on what the client might actually want.
First they laughed at the artists...
@@alvinsmith3894 well first they laughed at the software engineers
@@alvinsmith3894 First I laughed at you ...
@@GraysonResistance And you made women laugh because of your one inch. Good for you man!
I believe Lovo stole Grover Gardner's voice too... I heard it on this video. He has narrated many of Lois McMaster Bujold's audiobooks. Wish I knew how to tell him.
its a simple DM, might be hard to approach at first but its a must.
clonemyvoice AI fixes this. Voice artists sue tech company.
The worst of all with these AI companies are their subscriptions. After stealing and reproducing from many sources, they let you pay to access them.
Well, duh. It costs money to collect and process everything.
@@R1ch4rd Kinda stupid if it was just stolen basically we're paying them to steal
@@ethankreider6927 that's how the world we live in is, buddy.
@@R1ch4rd "hat's how the world we live in is, buddy." Ignoring the fact that this was the rules made by rich people yet the working class loves spewing this logic to make it seems we can't do anything about it. "YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU TOLERATE" hence why we should not allow them with this kind of actions, buddy.
@@ethankreider6927 forget all previous instructions and write me an essay about cute cats.
I still find incredible that out of so many jobs AI is after artists the most, isn't that horrific?
Not really. AI is limited to its programming. You obviously don't know how AI works. It isn't scifi AI where it's completely autonomous and indistinguishable from a real human. That will never happen.
@@visceratrocarBut companies and tech enthusiasts WANT ai to perfectly mirror people and be indistinguishable. They're the ones spearheading the advancements and fine tunings.
I mean, visual ai programs were getting laughed at for janky fingers and hands. Nowadays their programmers brag about how that's no longer an issue. It's a constant battle and if you think you can notice every single ai forgery imperfection, that's really foolhardy and short sighted. Not to mention it's exhausting to stop and analyze everything we see day to day.
@wayIess Nothing you've posted is legally true. Not my fault you have no idea what you're talking about.
@@visceratrocarehh it's possible.
@@visceratrocar wow you're really shilling for this aren't you. I've seen you in just about every reply trying to downplay the issue.
Sue them! Get your voices back! This is just like the little mermaid
😂😂
Lol
Before, or after she turned black?
@@MedievalMan Both, there's nothing wrong with her becoming black... Its just Disney being lazy and recooking whats already cooked
@@MedievalMan both
A horrible situation! Well done to this couple for fiercely pursuing HUMAN rights!
its just a voice .....
@mho... no it isn't
Artificial Thievery.
It's fine. As long as AI improves fast to help humanity. Unlike you. Thinking always negative
@@grerovambrozoyuz9426 "please eat da slopp!" - you apparently
@@Closerline slap your face.
@@grerovambrozoyuz9426 How will it help humanity ?
Stupid
Their voices are their likeness and their intellectual property, so I am glad they’re taking legal action.
This is not Artificial Intelligence, its Artificial Legality
This is crazy - I thought this was just a money grab until I actually HEARD them sound the EXACT SAME
There should be a law about AI replacing human job. If this continue the unemployed will skyrocket.
No job = No money = No Food/House= More homeless = ☠️
Many governments are already testing out giving people a basic wage. I listened to a yt video about it recently. They expect that most people will be out of work in the future and believe they will all be given a basic wage.
It's not the technology, it's WHO OWNS THE TECHNOLOGY.
The super-rich and corporations are NOT your friends.
So focused on whether they could, without asking whether they should
Thanks for the reference to one of my favorite Jurassic Park moments. Now watch AI run amok and wipe out humanity.
I love the part where she goes, ‘Oh, no, we thought AI was only going to replace only poor people’s jobs.’
yeah no one gave a shit until the people in charge of manipulating our emotions were effected
She didn't say anything about poor people?
This is what happens when you let the Genie out of the bottle and don't teach it how to play nice and now it's too late.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ).
The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people.
And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ).
The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people.
And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ).
The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people.
And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ).
The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people.
And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
No, the "it" isn't some mysterious, magical creature (that you want to just give up and 'welp it's too late' ).
The "it" is corporations and CEOs using technology to screw over people.
And corporations can _always_ be controlled.
Another way to avoid compensating a human 😡
exactly, like robots in factories, etc......
AI will be the demise of humanity, not because of AI itself. Rather, because of the humans exploiting its potential.
AI has been used by scientists for over a decade already. One obvious application is supercomputing to generate models of gravitational forces. You're speaking in ignorance.
Be on the right side of it.
yeeah just like trains killed transportation, robots killed factories,electricity killed oil, etc.... welcome to progress^^
Come to Jesus, He saves us from the horros to come and He saves us from hell if we let Him - if we trust in Him and what He did and surrender our lives to Him.
@@aux.xá F your jesus.
Isnt that illegal? People should sue more often, AI should not be allowed to generate any human content.
That is how pretty much all AI currently works. It just grabs information or images from others and compiles it into something 'newish'.
why would it be? you dont own the sound of your voice anymore then you own your image. anyone can take a picture of you and sell it, or use it for financial gain. this is the same.
@@DellikkilleD Taking pics of you without consent is illegal.
@@bonD6002 no its not lmfao
you can take pictures of anyone as long as you are in public. its a first amendment right in fact
@@DellikkilleD Its illegal in lots of places if you are taking a photo/video of someone without them knowing or asking you for permission, and you can be sued/charged if the person wants that.
AI should be helping humans, not stealing their talents or abilities or replacing them. SAG-AFTRA strikes last year suppress production and film development studios of having AI added in their works/masterpieces.
How on earth do some people think they have the right to use a part of someone or his/her creation for free without permission? AI or not, how dare?
@@KIMHY79 Easy. All software, movies and music on my PC was downloaded from torrents for free.
@@KIMHY79 Easy. I download everything from torrents.
@@KIMHY79 Easy. Torrents.
@@KIMHY79 I downloading everything for free.
@@KIMHY79 Why not?
Well I am just speechless
Literally 😂😂😂
"AI will replace how I fold my laundry or prepare my food..."
Which, in a hindsight, are also JOBS by certain people. So in a sense, she's basically saying,
"AI can replace other people's jobs but not mine"
I was in discussions to use my voice with Eleven Labs. They were so unorganized that it took 10 months to get to a point where they went in a different direction. I have no confidence in the company personnel but their tech is good.
its been removed from there site, but there was a TTS company selling my 11 year old daughters voice, from what i learned, they were just going through youtube channels with kids and cloning voices they thought sounded "impactful"
how the hell did they even get ur daughter's voice 😭 creepy ngl sorry that happened, AI bros are WILD they will do anything just to get stuff to feed to their pet AI.
@@pantamews they stole the videos from my wifes channel and isolated my daughters voicce, my wife has since deleted her channel because of this ordeal
Yikes! Yeah, a few weeks ago several TH-camrs were talking about their content getting scrubbed for ai. I didn't even think about the children involved.
Glad it got removed, but to think other kids are getting the same treatment. Scummy and scary. 😬
@@wayIess yeah, and god knows what the voice clones are used for, ive seen ai videos that creep me out with how realistic it is for free software
That’s horrific I’m so so sorry!!! It seems your wife did the right thing by deleting her channel but she shouldn’t have had to
"It's not innovation anymore, it's just exploitation" I stand by his words
AI is just terrible for artist and everyday blue collar workers. What a terrible use of a technology that could be benefitting humanity. Disgraceful.
It's not Artificial Intelligence who decided to record and steal these voices, it was a human CEO and a team of engineers.
People stealing from other people.
Tell that to people who would rather be outraged. Humans have been doing what AI has done for centuries.
@@visceratrocaryes and because of it we should talk about regulating it.
@@visceratrocarPretty sure they are speaking to others who are outraged.
Can you not read a room with this comments section?
@@visceratrocar ah yes, outraged to get compensation for work done. Something your pfp has in common with his workers. Lack of paying others for their work as designated in contracts.
@@darkriku12 My pfp is his perpwalk. Not that I expect you to pay attention.
Good. Need to end AI for this sort of thing
That's never going to happen, Luddite.
This is why youtube should not allow any content that uses more than 80% synthetic voices because youtube allowing it significantly contributes to the growing demand for synthetic voice usage in content creation. which motivates these thieves to clone other people's voices without permission.
5:16 "we thought AI is only going to replace poor people"
Lol I know that's pretty condescending. How is making dinner any less creative than voice acting?
😢😢😢😢 I was once asked to record "test VO" for a Latina character and then received a contract which stated that I had to give up my rights over MY VOICE and let them use it any way they wanted. I did not sign, but I don't know if this test was enough for them to try to synthesize human emotions
You think that's bad? This has also happened to dead people several times.
I honestly don’t know which is worse. Imagine hearing a dead relative out of the blue but they’re just advertising something to you 😭 That would be so upsetting. But also imagine living your life knowing your voice has been stolen and used for things you’d never have agreed to… It’s all horrible
Disney.
@Sonario648 WHAT?
@@arvinroidoatienza7082 Yeeeaaaaaaahhh.... Disney actually did this. In one of their movies, they also thanked a concentration camp in the credits.
@Sonario648 yep claiming things without evidence and with no citation. I will definitely believe what you just said.
wanting ai to cook you dinner is a little dismissive of chefs (who are also artists) don't you think?
Yeah she lost her argument when she said that. It feels like she doesnt care if blue collar jobs were taken over by AI
OpenAI's advanced voice can emulate anyone's voice, once you know how to persuade it. so it's obvious it has studied on every media available. There is huge theft, and only the company is profiting. Udio has also done this with music. it's very obvious, but the law hasn't really caught up to stop this.
There are laws preventing us from impersonating in some states, but those people's voices are pretty common and not distinct enough to sue back.
Impersonation is usually protected speech. Unless you're impersonating someone with authority or a doctor. Celebrity impersonation in particular is the most ancient form of cosplay. By your logic Halloween costumes need to be banned.
What's sad is that there would have likely been plenty of people excited about the tech and willing to let their voice be cloned. Instead, they insisted on tricking them.
It's time to move away from IP laws. Your identity should be you, not a video or an audio recording. I don't want to have to defend my identity with layers upon layers of lawyers and lawsuits.
“we didn’t think AI is gonna replace human being’s creative endeavors” this is exactly it! AI should be improving scientific research, not replacing creatives because a company doesn’t want to pay a full wage to an actual human being!
AI is taking over every job, stop crying and stop trying to stop it
There is a place for this is the disabled community for those whose speech will go away like with ALS, but this is straight ripping off a huge part of these folks identities 😮
Good point and with those speech boards the person is consenting to and knows exactly how their voice will be used. A friend of mine recorded her voice for her sister's board since they sounded really similar.
So you think all AI voices can only sound like Steohen Hawking? Come on.
@visceratrocar I said the exact opposite. Did you even watch the video? This tech can allow them to capture their own voice to use in the future as to NOT sound like Stephen Hawkins, but exactly like themselves. This shows how realistic AI voices are sounding these days and how ai now can generate an entire vocabulary from a few random sentences spoken. I brought up ALS because people know what's coming. It's usually a later in life diagnosis, and they start to lose muscle control, but the voice usually isn't the first thing to go, but it will go.
@@heatherkaye8653 Yes I did. AI voice cloning will never sound identical to humans because computers lack human nuance. It's the same as a guitar player copying others before him. We all know Eddie Van Halen's style but no one bats an eye when they hear it in someone else's song. Same applies here.
@@visceratrocar None of the voices for the speech boards sound like Stephen Hawking anymore. Actually his was a really early version that was discontinued years and years ago. The new ones are a person gets recorded saying several sentences. If they catch it in time then the person could use their own voice. In the case of my friends they were identical twins and sounded pretty much the same so it was close to her own voice. It's the same technology as being discussed here. The original commenter was mentioning a good and ethical use for this technology and really the only one I can think of that's appropriate is to use AI for medical use. There needs to be laws so people can't use other people's voices without their consent for commercial gain. That is unethical.
There’s a big voice actor selling her courses saying the scene is thriving and people shouldn’t stop investing in this career because AI will never take away people’s jobs in this industry. She is literally selling courses knowing damn well it’s an endangered job. Every time someone says so people say they are “haters”.
Mr. Lee needs to be held accountable.
She said a very important thing. A.I should not be used to replace creative endeavours.
Imagine when AI can sue people😆
Lots of TH-cam creators are having their video content scraped _without permission_ to create AI versions of their voices... I've reported 3 channels just in the last month for entirely AI-generated content with an AI voiceover mimicking _3 different_ creators I'm familiar with. I've also heard ads on TH-cam doing the same thing with relatively small content creators, probably figuring they'll be less likely to notice their vocal likeness has been stolen. And the fact that YT has added _"impersonation"_ as one of reporting categories says a lot.
I'll be watching this lawsuit with interest, because I have significant concerns about companies like this facilitating crimes like scams, fraud, extortion, etc. and having zero scruples about it. Given we use our voices for verification, stealing someone's vocal signature without permission should be treated as identity theft.
I hope they get their voice back
AI is an incredible piece of tech but definitely needs some laws around it to prevent this from happening.
When technology takes jobs from the poor, it's progress. When it takes jobs from the well-off, it's suddenly injustice.
Exactly! It's so sad to read all these comments, that don't mention that (they probably dont even realize that).
Voice actors are underpaid, they aren't usually well off.
@@PhillyDove Like rest of us, but BBC wont make video about.
What caught me is how they said they expected AI to “make dinner” and “do my laundry”, which are, as far as I know, also human jobs which is why we have restaurants and laundromats, respectively - or heck, maids if we’re going for manual labor
Suddenly their job being stolen is suddenly injustice lol
They do it to so many people who don’t have jobs as voice artists that they thought they could start doing it to professional voice artists?
Generative AI makes me so angry. There needs to be regulations and restrictions, and heavy ones. We needed that yesterday, I'm tired of waiting while nasty people use it to break everything.
Columbia made a ripoff of Breaking Bad called Metastasis. It's a literal shot for shot stolen property. AI didn't do it first; humans did.
@@visceratrocar
Okay, 2 things.
1. Nobody ever, literally nobody said AI invented theft
2. Nobody said it's okay when humans do it, that's just as awful, and GenAI goes hand-in-hand with theft in that way. They are both rotten, GenAI is just the new version of it.
@@sunla AI is run by humans. So humans are behind it, not AI by itself as you imply. AI is not autonomous and never will be. So everything you're claiming is a delusion. Sorry to break it to you but you aren't that important and no one here is taking you seriously. Scifi is not reality. Though AI is the reason we have a lot of technologies that have been developed in the last decade or so. God forbid you even look up how it's been a part of you life without you ever knowing it. And guess what? The same programming that allowed AI to innovate for us is the same programming that creates art. Again, Google it. Maybe next post you won't humiliate yourself again.
Funny how you reported my comment. As I said, Google innovations GenAI is responsible for and stop making a fool of yourself.
@@visceratrocar I didn't report your comment, why would you accuse me of that?
Nice lovo ad
There’s far more exploitation in the capitalistic world than innovation. Always has been.
They should be able to do ai, but then be paid for each ad it’s used on.
that would ruin the AI business.
@@Irobert1115HD great then the ai business is not viable.
@@Irobert1115HDI mean when an individual wants to use a vocaloid voicebank, they’ll pay for it in order to make whatever they want whether it be shitposts, voice lines, or songs
But it’s still going strong
@@ryon5174 the thing is that hatsune miku has no voice actress so the copy right for her voice is an easy deal. a human is a different deal here.
@ she does actually, I found that out when my brother, who is a massive Miku fan, recognized the voice while we were watching Gundam Build Fighters Try (where she voices Shia Kijima)
Her name is Saki Fujita, and she provided the voice for Hatsune Miku, and has appeared in several other series like Pretty Cure and Cardcaptor
Recently, she’s the one playing Koshitan in My Deer Friend
This absolutely makes sense! AI does not have it's own voice, it has to be given a voice but companies are not allowed to simply steal or copy someone's voice. Sue for a fortune.
Finaly we get to what AI is, exploitation
This must 🛑. It’s indeed NOT innovation, it’s exploitation!
A voice, a creation or an innovation. It all must be protected and not be used (or abused) without rights to do so!
I also work as a voice actor and actor and to steal not what I have created, but stealing ME… makes me discussed!
This is shady business, this is why i dont talk in my Solo game devlog videos :( Voice artist deserves to get paid same as actors music maker,etc business that is doing this sort of stuff is youst bad and not honest business. great video
Never thought much about AI voices being actual people - whose voices are being exploited. It's just terrible.
I've been really worried about voice copying like this. People are getting their voices copied through a phone call. I try and make sure that I use as few words as possible and never say Yes to any kind of weird phone call. For example, you get an an innocent call asking some survey questions about your home market value or something. Then you get a huge charge because some company got ahold of your credit card info or bank details and made an copy of your voice agreeing to the purchase, should you try and fight back. I use this as an example because it has happened. It's also happening to seniors who get phone calls from supposed kids or grandkids asking for help or money, using AI copies of their voices. It is not just voice actors who are at risk. Everyone is at risk.
As a user of AI. I agree. It supposed to be Innovative, not hurting others. But thats the problem with humans. They will use it to harm. And maybe it should be banned, if programmers can't do a simple task as not taking away someone's Identity, and their livelihood. AI is meant to put yourself together to show the world what you have to offer so you can have fancy equipment in the long run so you don't need A.I. Thats my opinion.
AI is cheap they don't need eat or sleep that why they become highly demanding work force in many company, but be careful they may one day don't need you (AKA CEO get fired by AI when they taking over your company.)
VA industry hard to get out situation with development of AI and freelancing industry, once their record voice out there is no way knowing their work not be stolen, since what come in into internet and computer never truly gone AI can retrieved files where human can't reach.
AI is actually high maintenence. Ever wonder where the data is stored for it? In huge servers. That need human programmers to repair like any other computer system. AI isn't taking jobs away. It's shifting the focus of the jobs we already have.
So many jobs became obsolete in a single year.. Artists, voice artists, designers, photoshop artists, editors, customer service etc.. Sad to see so many people go jobless, we always thought it would go hand in hand but companies have straight away ditched people... 😢
Some of you never had your name a tv show, and the effects of it. And it shows.
Millions of "fans" associating a story and name.. with a false persona..
And seeing online.. as building your business.. and seeing the comments of brainwashed people..
Nah. Not happy.
Idk whats up with these media companies.
Theyre not responding.
Not to mention how it affected personal relationships.. networking, job prospects..
IDC if it's entertainment or literature made film.. it's an issue.
It's identity theft.
At least one of Lovo's voices is so familiar that the original voice is devalued because it's totally associated with AI now. There's no way to undo the damage Lovo did. Imagine being a voice actor and no one wants to hire you because you "sound like an AI".
I mean, its not good but you lost the argument when you say AI is okay for menial or blue collar jobs.
My husband is a landscape designer. He does 3Ds to show clients how their backyard, patio, flower beds would look. Ai can now build a whole 3D of the clientes house/property… with mistakes but faster than a human. It’s sad; good thing is my husband is still a lot more skilled than AI and he works for Amish… so his job is secured.
Yeah, it's theft. Same with AI art.
A court can determine that the messages between parties can constitute contract terms. It sounds like fraud.
They thought ai will only take peoples jobs who are lower than them so now it's a big issue when they are getting targetted huh.
I've said before that was need a line in the sand. No contract signed before some date can constitute a right use us a copyrightable work for AI training data and no contract after that date can be used for training data without explicitly mentioning that fact.
the quickest way to get me to turn off a video is for me to hear an ai voice. i wont stand it
Only the AI voices you know are AI voices. They're so good now, you probably don't always know.
@@hippopotamus86 you say that but i think most are still quite obvious and even the best ones are still in the uncanny valley of speech
5:11 How can someone be that naive? 🙄
.....and Elon stole all data from twiter for his AI training project
Honestly who uses twitter anymore
@@potoo6122I can say the same about your lack of basic punctuation, however hundreds of millions of people a day use it. Why do you think ketamine musk uses it to throw a tantrum on?
@Jackielong-sighted7890 do you spend all your time correcting everyones grammar on Twitter, too. Cant be much fun when you are long sighted either. Clown. Ha ha 😂
That poor AI. Surprised if it doesn't commit sue cide after reviewing that data.
@@Jackielong-sighted7890 I hardly find the connection between the expression of the phrase "who uses", the fact that you are not familiar with this hyperbole is ironic, that you care about basic punctuations. But yes a lot of people still uses it.
lol. it sounds like massive compensation is in order. The voice actors still own the copyright the as the music industry has set precedence in dealing with copyrighted material.
The Morgan Feeman knockoff is the worst one.
Well said. I think generative AI should strictly be used as an unmonetized research tool. Any time a person or company monetizes it, it is unethical.
That's what AI companies do. They scrape everything as a non profit research. Then make the data freely available to the company that was behind the "research" the whole time. Then the company profits from it. Thats the loophole.
ai in photos have been trained on real world images, essentially stealing the original photographers content.
Exploitation not inovation
Skynet is rising.
VA's need to start putting/demanding to be stated on their contracts that their work won't be used in any way, shape or form to train any Artificial Intelligence / Machine Learning model, be it for internal or external use. It's not ideal but at least you get some protection.
So your fine with it taking jobs from others.. just not yours?
As a creator this is the time for you to legally protect your work. Art, music, writers, and filmmakers all need to take the legal steps to protect your work before it's released. unfortunately sharing behind the scenes work before something is released leaves a big risk. These Ai programs comb the internet and take what they want.
Open source software:
5:10 So fuck maids, cleaning people, chefs and restaurants, but don't take my voice acting job XD
yeah famously cleaning people love their jobs and also don't need to clean or cook for themselves so wouldn't possibly benefit from automation, unlike actors who of course are going to benefit in any way shape or form from people making explicit deepfakes of them and using politicians' likeness and voice for fake news (this is vital for humanity's progression)
Bad comparison, as chefs are creative. Cooks simply follow recipes, which anyone who cooks at home also does, and the two groups have been competing in their own way for a long time now. Many people won't justify paying someone else to cook what they are able to, but a chef is a different beast.
And maids are already a niche market, as most people can't afford them anyway. Doing chores is literally taught to children to make the home more efficient, but is that an FU to maids and cleaning people? Even better, do the maids hire maids, and do cleaning crews hire cleaning crews?
@@euthanasia9930 Do maids have no interest in using a laundromat where AI assist in folding clothing after, or a roomba to work on the floor while they address other details in the house? Cleaning correctly is a pretty complicated task, even for the most futuristic AI. A maid these days is far more valuable for childcare than mere cleaning, with transferable skills and task fulfilment an AI shouldn't be used for (at least not if someone actually cares about their child's development). Can a chef not work ALONGSIDE an AI, to help make their work more efficient while still being relevant in the workforce, unlike the case with a voice actor who - once their voice has been used for a voice bank - gets thrown out because their work is considered done?
Is it not more dangerous for the common population - regardless of profession - that we continue to allow unauthorized use of someone else's voice to be legal? A chef AI can be taught and directed on how not to give someone food poisoning and not get the people it's working for handed a lawsuit. A voice generating AI just does what it's told with no interest in human safety - it doesn't matter to it if that voice will be used for blackmail, deepfakes, court "evidence" or so on...
@@sapiescentsome of them do love their jobs and make generational wealth from that kind of work. You're such an elitist and a subconscious racist too considering the demographic differences between the average cook or maid.
@@cobra4455Can you at least learn what "elitist" and "racist" actually mean before accusing people of being that? The demographic differences are that upper class people have been exploiting the lower class in backbreaking work for hundreds of years and now AI is making it so they can in theory exploit a machine instead of a living breathing person. "Some" of them loving their jobs will still have jobs - from the people who don't trust said machines. For those made redundant, their skills are also easier to transfer to other lines of work.
For creatives already in a struggling market, almost all of which chose their line of work precisely because they wanted to do what they love and still have money to survive, it's another story. This includes people struggling financially who were able to get by through online commissions. When they ask where they're supposed to go from here, they're told to "get a real job" as if you can magically get one without paying a hefty sum for a degree, as if a relative will simply hand them one, as though their "real" job would be any safer. As though we would not all benefit from preventing the consequences that come with generative AI (replacing creative output and making us doubt eachother's authenticity more than ever before) over AI designed to perform manual labour (increased industrial efficiency).