Porperty is a bundle of rights, and often hard to pin down. In the case of voices, if a company owns enough of your data to train a good simulacrum, and they have the right to do it, then they kind of do own your voice -- or more precisely, a damn good substitute.
> Belyaev is a 29-year-old synthetic-speech artist at the Ukrainian start-up Respeecher, which uses archival recordings and a proprietary A.I. algorithm to create new dialogue with the voices of performers from long ago. The company worked with Lucasfilm to generate the voice of a young Luke Skywalker for Disney+’s The Book of Boba Fett, and the recent Obi-Wan Kenobi series tasked them with making Darth Vader sound like James Earl Jones’s dark side villain from 45 years ago, now that Jones’s voice has altered with age and he has stepped back from the role.
Copyright is complex. And artist's rights are outside of copyright, in some respects. An example.. in the past, painters have had their works bought, and then hung in unfavourable conditions. Or in places/locations, which reflect poorly upon the work of art.
Artists have sued, and won, to have artwork moved, shown differently, or force-sold back to the artist.
Now, everything you say is copyright... you. At least in my legal jurisdiction! Even my image is, in Quebec! Yes, that includes if you take my picture outside.
So what of one's voice? And if you don't have a real agreement, to use that voice in any way desired. And then you use that voice to.. I don't know, advocate for terrorists or something weird.
What then?
I don't think it's completely clearcut, and I think there will be changes, decisions on this going down the road.
We've seen plenty of examples of famous people suing companies for using their likeness in ads as if they are promoting a product. Tom Hanks' name is currently in the news for this.
If a company uses an actor's previously recorded dialog to be edited in a way that makes them sound in favor of terrorism on the attempt to have people think the actor said the words, we have issues on so many levels. If the dialog is chopped/re-edited to use as dialog for the same character in later works, then I really don't have issues with it.
I pay little attention to SAG contracts, but after the Writer's Guild strike, I'd be expecting SAG to follow suit with major asks to protect its members from AI if they have not already covered it.
thanks. i have recently been asked by a couple of acquaintances that have done a few character voices in the past what I thought on AI and what can really be done with it. because of their infrequent performances, they aren't union members, but I'll pass along these links.
"Independent of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to the said work, which would be prejudicial to the author's honor or reputation."
"The authors of dramatic works (plays, etc.) also have the right to authorize the public performance of their works (Article 11, Berne Convention)."
"The protection of the moral rights of an author is based on the view that a creative work is in some way an expression of the author's personality: the moral rights are therefore personal to the author and cannot be transferred to another person except by testament when the author dies."
"“Author” is used in a very wide sense, and includes composers, artists, sculptors and even architects"
Architects can deny changes in interior design: Lighting, artwork, etc., long after the building is finished. Just a few days ago I talked with a theater director: The author of the original work has the right to deny a production, for whatever reason, e.g. if they don't like the nose of an actor.
I bet my voice is mine under most jurisdictions (and I mean most; the Berne convention has been signed by 181 countries), even if I signed a contract that gives you wide permission to use it. And if I didn't, you can't use it outside of the very narrow scope of the work I produced for you. Even if you simply want to reuse an existing recording in another context.
If they are using their real voice, then they kind of screwed themselves. If they are performing a character voice, then at least they only lose out on that kind of work.
I'm guessing contracts will need to be updated to say that a character's voice made from AI can't be used so a completely different production cannot say they have the actor attached for publicity purposes.
A person's voice is effectively owned by the corresponding person through right of publicity, which includes voice depending on jurisdiction.
California, for example:
"Any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof."
Voices can sound very similar, they're far from unique. Clearly if you say or somehow strongly imply that a voice belongs to a specific person then that is protected. But what if you use someone's voice, someone not especially well known, and don't make any claims about where it comes from?
I don't think it's that clear at all. You own your "likeness", but the limits of what that means is highly untested. Of the similar examples that have been tested in court thus far, the Ford v Midler case is the closest, but the court specifically called out the fact that as a singer her voice is a distinctive part of their identity, and so it is protected.