They payed for the voiced lines, they received the voiced lines. They can use them however they want, including changing, mixing and doing whatever else with them.
Yeah, I think going forward, the contracts would be rewritten to take this into account. But if old contracts did not cover it, it’s probably a lost cause to be angry about it
That’s not what happened though, they didn’t take the lines, cut them up in audacity and move them around, they took all the voice samples, put it through an ai generator and generated that actors voice pulling lines in their voice that they never recorded. Not only is this in really poor taste, essentially stealing an actors voice during a really temultious time in AI development, they never asked for consent, or even told anyone that their voice would be fed into an ai model so that they could essentially get free voice overs forever without paying the actors again
I don’t even know if I agree with that tbh - I’ve yet to see anything that actually shows that AI voiceovers can replace human ones. Oh they can make realistic speech, but they can’t voice act. A voice actor isn’t just a person who reads a script in a monotone, they’re an actor.
AI will probably eventually get good enough to understand the context of the dialogue and add the appropriate inflections and such - but nothing today comes even close
That’s what this technology will change. If you picture ‘insert script, receive audio,’ then yeah, it’ll suck. But if you see it as a tool - it’s going to let artists create a performance, without a performer. It’s an instrument they can guide and tweak and endlessly fiddle with.
Or more directly, it’ll let someone say a line like they want it to sound, and then transfer that to someone else’s voice. And it doesn’t need to be someone real.
Add comment