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.

  • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    “That use AI to violate the law”

    Watch out impressionists. If you get too good you might become a lawbreaker. The AI hysteria is beyond absurd.

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

      AI hysteria

      This is the concise way of putting it that I’ve been missing.

      Using AI to do something that actually intelligent beings already legally do, like impressions and parody (with disclaimers and all that), isn’t suddenly theft or stealing because AI was used in the process. I’m really disappointed in the Lemmy community for buying into all this bs

    • Tyfud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      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.

      • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        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
          0
          ·
          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
            0
            ·
            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
              1
              ·
              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.

    • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Impressionists have nothing to do with this.

      If I scraped all Beyonce’s videos, cut it up and join it into another video, and called it “Beyonce: resurrected”, I’m not doing am impression. I’m stealing someone’s work and likeness for commercial purposes.

      Are you sad that your garbage generator is just a plagiarism machine?

      • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Actually cutting it up into another video makes it transformative and it’s protected under the DMCA. Thank you for proving you don’t know what you’re talking about. Take care.

        • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Sure mate. You try selling a copy of it.

          Likewise. You’re either too dumb or stubborn to even google what “transformative work” is.

          Typical “AI” techbro.

      • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        You’re understimating what generative AI can do. I was shocked when I realized that GPT-3 was able to do creative writing, something that we thought would be out of reach after things like doing management and self driving cars. Turns out, creativity is what AI can actually do. Watch the video. This is like George Carlin but not using any of his material, instead creating something completely new in the style of George Carlin. They could have used the style and a slightly different voice, but they wanted to make a point here.

        If your argument is that minds, be they artificial or human, are not allowed to learn from other peoples works then… well then that is a very immoral argument to make imho.

          • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s not what I’m saying, What we currently have is more like the disembodied creative writing center of a brain, without memory or conscience but able to do creative writing. But it seems pretty clear now that we will have sentient artificial minds sooner than later.

            And the last thing we need is to use intellectual “property” arguments to regulate this.