this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
301 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

59370 readers
932 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] recursive_recursion@programming.dev 104 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Capitalism: steal first, apologize with no real repurcussions later

[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sadly, it was Grace Hopper who said "It's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission."

Rear Admiral Grace Murray Hopper (9 December 1906 – 1 January 1992) was a U.S. Naval officer, and an early computer programmer. She was the developer of the first compiler for a computer programming language; at the end of her service she was the oldest serving officer in the United States Navy.

That brings me to the most important piece of advice that I can give to all of you: if you've got a good idea, and it's a contribution, I want you to go ahead and DO IT. It is much easier to apologize than it is to get permission.

  • The future: Hardware, Software, and People in Carver, 1983
[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Except she probably wasn't referring to identity theft; just how to handle dumb shits in management.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, there's some key qualifiers in there

if you’ve got a good idea, and it’s a contribution

Identity theft is neither a good idea or a contribution to society

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago

trump x biden fan fiction being voiced with deepfaked voices is both a good idea, and beneficial to society.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Dumb shits in military management. And she was an admiral; near the top of that management.

[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago

Well, she did tell that she didn't get a budget, so they just effectively stole from other departments. Want a table that's not bolted down? Take it.

But that's Navy internals, (arguably) not a massive for-profit company that's going it out of sheer greed.

[–] nehal3m@sh.itjust.works 62 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Oh so I guess piracy is fine if it’s citizens getting robbed huh? Funny how that works.

[–] Dadifer@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

I think you misspelled capitalism.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sony will pirate from anyone who isn't Sony. Same with Time-Warner. Same with Columbia. Same with every studio, every label, every publishing house.

Absolutely no-one in the industry takes piracy seriously until it's their own stuff being pirated by someone else.

Moreover, they all are used to Hollywood accounting, in which lawyers try to justify not paying someone for work whenever they can.

Hollywood. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 1 month ago

A fantastic example is the Verve's Bitter Sweet Symphony.

It samples a few seconds of a Rolling Stones song. For this, the former Stones manager Allen Klein sues them. The Verve gives up all royalties for the whole song. So the Stones are getting that money, right? No, Klein had the ownership of the piece in question go to himself.

Klein dies in 2009, and the rights to everything finally revert to the Stones in 2019. They think the whole sampling thing with the Verve is stupid, and relinquish the song's rights back to them.

For about 20 years, it was not only morally OK to pirate that song, but morally obligatory. The execs of the industry don't give a shit about the artists.

[–] thehatfox@lemmy.world 44 points 1 month ago (14 children)

We are going to need much stronger image rights for individuals in the AI age.

There’s no way to stop the technology itself (although current development may plateau at some point), so there must be strong legal restrictions on abusing it.

[–] greybeard@lemmy.one 6 points 1 month ago

Yeah, the genie is out of the bottle on this one. I can do voice cloning with consumer hardware and available models. That can't be undone, but good legal protections would be nice.

That said, the Johanson case is a bad example because it really didn't sound much like her at all. It was a chipper yound white lady sound, but to my ear sounded nothing like Johanson. It did sound kinda like a character she voiced, but I would not gave confused the two. They cloned the voice of someone they paid to give a similar inflection as the voice from Her. That's far removed from cloning Johanson herself. It is closer to people making music "in the style of".

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 month ago

Legal plagiarism machine

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Ok this ~~is~~ seems like a problem of trademark not copyright, or impersonation and fraud by pretending to be him. It's about his name, not really about his voice. His voice is also pretty generic EDIT: it's only in this specific market segment that it's problematic.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not sure if the video said it was from him or not. It's been taken down, so I can't check, but I don't think it ever made that claim. Someone just noticed it sounded the same as Jeff.

It's copyright because they had to have fed the model with voice data from Jeff's videos.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

Well in this case they used his likeness and brand to appear more legitimate and make money. So I'd argue this is trademark (even if not registered) so a legitimate complaint.

I don't believe in "copyright" for a voice. See for example impersonators. But in this case it's a deliberate deception which is pretty simple.

I don't believe in intellectual property at all and think it is a form of theft, to deprive others from common knowledge or information just to seek rent. In case of patents I equate it even to aiding in genocide, since most advances in more energy efficiency use are patented and exploited for profit and slowing down adaptation. Without exhaustive attempts to try other systems to pay creators, copyright law is a moral abomination. That is a philosophical or ethical argument, not a legal one.

load more comments
view more: next ›