George Carlin Estate Files Lawsuit Against Group Behind AI-Generated Stand-Up Special: ‘A Casual Theft of a Great American Artist’s Work’::George Carlin’s estate has filed a lawsuit against the creators behind an AI-generated comedy special featuring a recreation of the comedian’s voice.

  • Tyfud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    That’s not what this is about though.

    AI should follow the standard norms and conventions we’ve established up to this point. Which, generally speaking, would prohibit using someone’s likeness without their consent to make a profit, and also not using the likeness of a well loved, dead man, in such a trashy way.

    You know, basic human decency.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      would prohibit using someone’s likeness without their consent to make a profit,

      On reddit years ago a whole mess of people attacked me and demanded that I agree that photographs have a right to take pictures of my house, car, property, and even children and put it on the internet.

      Which one is it? Do we humans own our image in which case we deserve compensation and permission for it’s use or do we not own it and in which case this is a perfectly acceptable?

    • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      “using someone’s likeness”

      Again, so someone can’t do a gilbert gottfried impression while doing their own stand-up? That’s illegal to do because their voice itself is copyright protected? Man, all these AI covers on Youtube are fucked then.

      You completely misunderstand the law to appeal to emotion which continues to feed into the hysteria around generative AI. Photoshop isn’t illegal, generative AI isn’t illegal, doing impressions isn’t illegal. This would be no different if someone took that same script and did their best George Carlin impression.

      • Tyfud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Building those isn’t illegal. Using them to make a profit without consent is. The law is very clear here. This is what is at issue here.

        • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Right so every single song, every use of Frank Sinatra’s voice on YouTube to cover songs is wildly illegal, yes? They have ads, they’re doing it for profit. The people who made the special didn’t sell access to it so how’d they make money? Same way I’d imagine.

          • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            those the use ai for it, yes actually. in fact, if we’re following the letter of copyright law, almost every meme is technically illegal.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              This is the best argument I have ever heard for getting rid of copyright law. It can’t be followed even if you want to.

            • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Okay then let’s focus on impressionists. Grapple with that for a minute because you seem to be avoiding it. If someone does a stand-up special they wrote and did a highly accurate impression of George Carlin, why is that illegal?