Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

7
  • This does not seem to be answering the question asked. The BBC had an article on the technology. It is quite technically feasible to train an AI of publically available voice samples. If one did this without getting permission, would the sources of the training set have any claim on the output of the neural network, assuming it did not explicitly claim to be {performer}?
    – Dave
    Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 15:03
  • @Dave. I see, I didn't quite understand the question. I am not at all sure what the status would be under copyright law. But my comments in the answer about rights of publicity and false advertising if this was done without permission still apply. The technology does not change those issues at all. Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 16:14
  • @Dave I have added to the answer based on your comment, does it address the question better now? Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 16:24
  • 2
    @Dave, the technology is irrelevant. If you find someone who looks like the spitting image of Donald Trump, and show him on TV saying "Hi, I am Donald Trump, and I tell you that Joe Smith's potato chips are the best in the world", then Donald Trump can sue you.
    – gnasher729
    Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 16:25
  • @gnasher729 well he could in some US states. and some other places Not all jurisdictions recognize rights of personality or rights of publicity. Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 16:27