IMHO, they should have not settled, and won a lawsuit for precedent, this is going to keep happening.
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
220 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
59534 readers
3195 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
My understanding is that this is what’s happening everywhere. Instead of establishing some precedent, every party is just cashing out with licence agreements or settlements. Basically hedging their bets it seems.
Meanwhile the game plan from big AI is obviously to keep burning cash until they rule the world (or die).
I tried listening to it. Didn't last more than 5m. It was horrible. Like a bad Vegas Seinfeld impersonator.
Best thing to come out of the lawsuit is to hopefully make people think twice before pulling a similar stunt.
And every chode out there was pretending it was good, too.
Almost seemed
Artificial
I looked up the transcript for it out of curiosity. The jokes aren't terrible I guess; they read a lot like the Carlin bits I'm familiar with. However, I got to the AI part and was like, "nah, they're pushing it too hard." I couldn't see the complaint until I got to that bit, and then I could understand why it made his estate uncomfortable.
If they'd used the AI bit to poke fun at themselves and talk about how AI's even replacing dead people without trying to push AI as the future, then I'd be confused as to why the Carlin estate is upset. However, right now AI primarily benefits the rich, so pushing AI as the future of humanity is contradictory even within the context of fake-Carlin routine because it goes against his takes about rich people ruining everything.
Good, fuck 'em. Stop ressurecting dead people with shitty inaccurate software hacks.
I have a few questions, and I am honestly asking from sheer lack of knowledge on how to even look this up.
From what I have read, you don't exactly have copyright of your own likeness, but rather rights to how you can restrict its use for privacy/publicity/commercial reasons. But that applies to you alone. Does your next of kin inherit the rights from you automatically? Can you convey those rights after death? Do people actually do that?
I'm genuinely interested to know if this case was even possible. It's definitely in poor taste, but despite that it is an interesting experiment and admittedly a good mimicry. Should we expect more like this, or less?
The law regarding likeness is much less unified than copyright. It even differs significantly between US states, not to mention internationally. So there's no simple answers to these questions.
Here's the WP page on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
I'm no expert, so I don't know if it's good. I'd take it with a grain of salt.
As to the case, here's an analysis by copyright lawyer Aaron Moss:
https://copyrightlately.com/carlin-estates-lawsuit-over-fake-comedy-special-may-be-doa/
Thank you for the read. I figured this one was a thorny issue without even considering the locale/jurisdiction aspect.
From the looks of it, this is an issue that is likely to have to be fought in court to deliver some precedent or legislation will have to directly target this... And that's just the American side.
I'm honestly glad these comedians and the Carlin family were able to come to a reasonable settlement, so that the Carlins themselves didn't have to be part of this eventual circus. I feel like George himself would find this scenario pointless and loathsome, and I only wish I could hear the real him talk about it haha.
I thought the special was hand written and performed, the only "AI" was the deep faked voice and face.
Every article seems to be intentionally misrepresenting it as AI written, at least in the title and synopsis.
Still a shitty thing to do without his estate's prior approval, but very very different than its being represented. All because "AI" is the new boogeyman
What is missing is that the podcast originally claimed it was entirely written and generated by AI. They only changed the story when they were sued.