[column]

If it's a sequel and Brad Pitt was in the first movie and you use trickery to make people think he's in the second movie, there's a case. See Crispin Glover, the dad from Back to the future, which was NOT the upside-down dad in BTTF2. They settled for 760k USD.

[rowanG077]

Openai never claimed it was Scarlett Johansson though. They didn't trick anyone.

[popalchemist]

Spielberg & co never claimed Glover was in BTTF 2. The replacement actor is credited. However they heavily implied that Glover came back, by approximating his appearance with prosthetics, preventing his face from being seen up close, and having the replacement actor mimic Glover's voice.

Glover sued and won.

[egeozcan]

> they heavily implied that Glover came back, by approximating his appearance with prosthetics, preventing his face from being seen up close, and having the replacement actor mimic Glover's voice

Do you think OpenAI did something similar here? In your case there is some expectation from the first movie, OpenAI doesn't have something similar. I'm really for people getting credit for their work/assets and I would be on the individual's side against the bigtech, but I think this case OpenAI and SJ have at hand already is on the path to set a wrong precedent, regardless of if any and which of them wins.

[lupire]

The movie "Her", which Sam Altman claimed ChatGPT was in some sense connected to, came first.

[rowanG077]

But there is a connection to it. It's about an AI assistant which is what openAI is releasing. Disregarding Scarlett Johansson completely and it makes total sense Sam Altman made that tweet.

[CRConrad]

Not explicitly, no. They just heavily implied it.

Typical sleazy open AI / Sam Altman behaviour, AFAICS.

[kombookcha]

Sam tweeting "Her" is a clear as daylight indication that they are deliberately trying to associate the voice with ScarJo's performance.

They're squarely in the zone with knockoff products deliberately aping the branding of the real thing.

"Dr Peppy isn't a trick to piggyback on Dr Pepper, it's a legally distinct brand!" might give you enough of a fig leaf in court with a good lawyer, but it's very obvious what kind of company you're running to anybody paying attention.

[z7]

Or he tweeted 'her' to compare his product with the movie AI's conversational abilities. It just depends on how one subjectively interprets a single syllable.

[kombookcha]

That would be a rather weird and boneheaded thing to do, when you've already twice approached said AI's voice actor and been rejected.

There are any number of human-sounding movie AI's, but apparently only one whose actor has specifically and repeatedly rejected this association.

Does he keep getting into ethical hot water because he's a reckless fool, or because he doesn't really care about ethics at all, despite all the theatre?

[MengerSponge]

¿Por qué no los dos?

[throwaway115]

There are many many many movies with conversational AIs. Why that one?

[sebzim4500]

'Her' is clearly the most similar to that demo, even ignoring the fact that they have slightly similar voices.

Of the films I've seen anyway.