The actor told an audience in London that AI was a “burning issue” for actors.

  • gregorum@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    When they reproduced Fry’s voice with an AI based on what they captured from the copyrighted audiobook, that’s precisely what happened. Just because you refuse to understand or admit it, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s not reproduction of content so isn’t a copyright violation. Not shouldn’t be. Literally right now is not.

      The whole reason people are so up in arms about this is that we do not currently have laws or even standards that accurately police this kind of thing.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That is not for you to decide. That is for a court to decide. By the letter of the law, and how current copyright law is written, it very clearly is.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am describing the current situation. You are the one describing events you hope to occur.

          • gregorum@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You are twisting yourself into knots to describe something other than what happened. All of which amounts to is an elaborate “Nuh uh”

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              No I’m looking at this the way a lawyer does.

              You know, like for court.

              • gregorum@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                So, like, arguing against the letter of the law, in order to defend a morally bankrupt practice in defense of profitability for large corporations, to rip off artists work.

                No, I got that

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That you think I am defending the people using Fry’s voice here is just further confirmation that you don’t understand what I’m saying.

                  I’m saying there aren’t laws or standards that accurately restrict this usage, and that is a bad thing and why people are upset.

                  • gregorum@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    All that it’s proof of is that you don’t understand what you’re talking about.

                    There are laws and standards which govern this usage, it’s called the digital millennium copyright act. While there does exist currently an argument for AI to co-op current works for what the DMCA refers to as “fair use“, whether these works would be regarded as “Derivative works” or unauthorized infringement is up for the courts to decide, not you.