In a product demo last week, OpenAI showcased a synthetic but expressive voice for ChatGPT called "Sky" that reminded many viewers of the flirty AI girlfriend Samantha played by Scarlett Johansson in the 2013 film Her. One of those viewers was Johansson herself, who promptly hired legal counsel and sent letters to OpenAI demanding an explanation, according to a statement released later. In response, the company on Sunday halted use of Sky and published a blog post insisting that it "is not an imitation of Scarlett Johansson but belongs to a different professional actress using her own natural speaking voice." Johansson's statement, released Monday, said she was "shocked, angered, and in disbelief" by OpenAI's demo using a voice she called "so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference." Johansson revealed that she had turned down a request last year from the company's CEO, Sam Altman, to voice ChatGPT and that he had reached out again two days before last week's demo in an attempt to change her mind.

This article investigates how AI-generated content can disrupt central revenue streams of the creative industries, in particular the collection of dividends from intellectual property (IP) rights. It reviews the IP and copyright questions related to the input and output of generative AI systems. A systematic method is proposed to assess whether AI-generated outputs, especially images, infringe previous copyrights, using a similarity metric (CLIP) between images against historical copyright rulings. An examination (economic and technical feasibility) of previously proposed compensation frameworks reveals their financial implications for creatives and IP holders. Lastly, we propose a novel IP framework for compensation of artists and IP holders based on their published "licensed AIs" as a new medium and asset from which to collect AI royalties.

Hallucinations pose a significant challenge to the reliability and alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs), limiting their widespread acceptance beyond chatbot applications. Despite ongoing efforts, hallucinations remain a prevalent challenge in LLMs. The detection of hallucinations itself is also a formidable task, frequently requiring manual labeling or constrained evaluations. This paper introduces an automated scalable framework that combines benchmarking LLMs' hallucination tendencies with efficient hallucination detection. We leverage LLMs to generate challenging tasks related to hypothetical phenomena, subsequently employing them as agents for efficient hallucination detection. The framework is domain-agnostic, allowing the use of any language model for benchmark creation or evaluation in any domain. We introduce the publicly available HypoTermQA Benchmarking Dataset, on which state-of-the-art models' performance ranged between 3% and 11%, and evaluator agents demonstrated a 6% error rate in hallucination prediction. The proposed framework provides opportunities to test and improve LLMs. Additionally, it has the potential to generate benchmarking datasets tailored to specific domains, such as law, health, and finance.

Jean-Luc Godard once claimed, regarding cinema, "When I die, it will be the end." Godard passed away last month; film perseveres. Yet artificial intelligence has raised a kindred specter: that humans may go obsolete long before their artistic mediums do. Novels scribed by GPT-3; art conjured by DALL·E--machines could be making art long after people are gone. As deepfakes evolve, fears are mounting that future films, TV shows, and commercials may not need them at all.

With the advent of the ability of artificial intelligence ("AI") to alter an individual's voice and image (whether in deepfakes or expressly fictional works), it is critical to determine who – if anyone – owns the right to do so, particularly when the voice or image is clearly identified with a fictional character from an existing film. This issue is highlighted by the recent license by James Earl Jones (the voice of Darth Vader) of his voice to an AI company. While articles state that the license of his voice was for use by Disney (the owner of the Star Wars franchise), the transaction raises the following questions: (a) could anyone use his voice without permission and (b) could James Earl Jones have licensed his voice to third parties for use in other films, particularly if used in the distinctive manner of Darth Vader? This article will refer to the individual whose voice or image is at issue as the "Individual," the licensee of AI rights as the "AI Licensee," the new AI work incorporating the voice or image as the "AI Work," and any prior work that the voice or image is taken from, or resembles elements of, as the "Prior Work." Let's first deal with the right of publicity.

Jean-Luc Godard once claimed, regarding cinema, "When I die, it will be the end." Godard passed away last month; film perseveres. Yet artificial intelligence has raised a kindred specter: that humans may go obsolete long before their artistic mediums do. Novels scribed by GPT-3; art conjured by DALL·E--machines could be making art long after people are gone. As deepfakes evolve, fears are mounting that future films, TV shows, and commercials may not need them at all.

Facebook became a known brand this century, but the iconic moniker was scrapped in favor of "Meta" in 2022. The latest from these lords of nomenclature is the Blenderbot 3, described in a blog post on ai.facebook.com The post, attributed to "Joelle Pineau, managing director of fundamental AI research at Meta," opens with a paragraph that begins by addressing "problematic or offensive language" and ends with a clunky evisceration of the English vernacular, to wit: "When we launched BlenderBot 3 a few days ago, we talked extensively about the promise and challenges that come with such a public demo, including the possibility that it could result in problematic or offensive language. While it is painful to see some of these offensive responses, public demos like this are important for building truly robust conversational AI systems and bridging the clear gap that exists today before such systems can be productionized." Frankenstein words like "productionized" should be edited out at this level, but never mind.

It's interesting whenever Elon Musk's name comes up and people begin discussing his accomplishments, such as the reinvention of money, automobiles and space travel, there's always someone who says: "Yeah, but I hear he can be a real dick." So then, let's be totally honest here, because in your heart, you know, and I know, dear reader, that you can be a real dick, too. So can I, and, if we're being truly honest, so can, say, the Queen. She probably has to be a dick 10 times a week. So since when does being a dick somehow invalidate you as a person?

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: With only 30 minutes of audio, companies can now create a digital clone of your voice and make it say words you never said. Using machine learning, voice AI companies like VocaliD can create synthetic voices from a person's recorded speech -- adopting unique qualities like speaking rhythm, pronunciation of consonants and vowels, and intonation. For tech companies, the ability to generate any sentence with a realistic-sounding human voice is an exciting, cost-saving frontier. But for the voice actors whose recordings form the foundation of text-to-speech (TTS) voices, this technology threatens to disrupt their livelihoods, raising questions about fair compensation and human agency in the age of AI. At the center of this reckoning is voice actress Bev Standing, who is suing TikTok after alleging the company used her voice for its text-to-speech feature without compensation or consent.

In May 2015, The Simpsons voice actor Harry Shearer – who plays a number of key characters including, quite incredibly, both Mr Burns and Waylon Smithers – announced that he was leaving the show. By then, the animated series had been running for more than 25 years, and the pay of its vocal cast had risen from $30,000 an episode in 1998 to $400,000 an episode from 2008 onwards. But Fox, the producer of The Simpsons, was looking to cut costs – and was threatening to cancel the series unless the voice actors took a 30 per cent pay cut. Most of them agreed, but Shearer (who had been critical of the show's declining quality) refused to sign – after more than two decades, he wanted to break out of the golden handcuffs, and win back the freedom and the time to pursue his own work. Showrunner Al Jean said Shearer's iconic characters – who also include Principal Skinner, Ned Flanders and Otto Mann – would be recast.