[b112]

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.

[dylan604]

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.

[dylan604]

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.

[minimaxir]

The current standard is the NAVA AI Rider: https://navavoices.org/2023/01/23/artificial-intelligence-ri...

NAVA also has guidelines for protection against AI abuse: https://navavoices.org/synth-ai/

[dylan604]

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.

[autoexec]

> Artists have sued, and won, to have artwork moved, shown differently, or force-sold back to the artist.

That seems insane to me. Do you have specific examples?

[rendx]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights

"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."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors%27_rights

"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.