In this case the AI voices are reading the exact copyrighted material so the original author or rights holder must be contacted to secure the necessary rights and licensing agreements. There is no free use argument.

Now, if the voices have been trained on copy protected sources to create a likenesses (e.g. Scarlet Johansson) then there could be a lawsuit.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. AI itself is an equation.

AI voices are not trained on books.

The ethical issue there is more around cloning celebrities

https://open.spotify.com/show/03fNX9EtXbfyVzR4z122Ir

Stock market logic, sell one cybertruck for $1m and your whole inventory is now worth 10x

deleted by creator

But it’s just removed all it’s chargers

Much better allegory than G vs G. Thanks.

Note that both of those rulings are for the original rights holders (and therefore against AI tech).

What’s interesting to me is that we now have a goliath vs goliath fight with AI tech in one corner and mpaa and riaa (+ a lot of case history) in the other.

Either was I can’t see David (us) coming out on top.

That case is about fair use for parody.

Case law suggests using AI for parody is legal.

That’s not the argument that is being made though.

In Meta’s court case it is one of the arguments.

So do you target AI training explicitly?

No. Same rules as everyone else.

How can that he even enforced?

Disclosure of training sources

Is my review sentiment evaluation machine illegal now?

If your sources are copyrighted, yes.

What if I RAG copyrighted content in am I in jail now?

Unlikely. None payment of restitution in a civil case could end in jail via contempt of court.

How could this possible be ever enforced?

The same way other copyright claims are enforced.

This issue is dominated by tech illiterate

Literacy in technology has no effect on the law.

fall for copyright propaganda.

We’re had many years of publishing strengthening their legal position. It’s case law, not propaganda.

it doesn’t include any identifiable pieces of the training data.

It does. For example, Harry Potter books can be easily identified.

court decisions on music sampling and so far those haven’t been consistent,

Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records Inc. (1991) - Rapper Biz Markie sampled Gilbert O’Sullivan’s “Alone Again (Naturally)” without permission

Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films (2005) - any unauthorized sampling, no matter how minimal, is infringement.

VMG Salsoul v. Ciccone (2016) - to determine whether use was de minimis it must be considered whether an average audience would recognize appropriation from the original work as present in the accused work.

the training of an AI is not piracy because no copying takes place.

One of the first steps of training is to copy the data into the training data set.

Most Reddit addicted city with over 100k visits total // 1. Eglin Air Force Base, FL

actors all over the world are performing trials exactly like this all the time

I marketing speak this is called A/B testing.

The key result

When researchers asked the AI to personalize its arguments to a Redditor’s biographical details, including gender, age, and political leanings (inferred, courtesy of another AI model, through the Redditor’s post history), a surprising number of minds indeed appear to have been changed. Those personalized AI arguments received, on average, far higher scores in the subreddit’s point system than nearly all human commenters

I agree with your stepfathers reasoning, but not his method.

How does it show? (Asking for red flags, not to create an argument).

I need a good reason to spend $2000 to do something I can already do with a $100 phone. Using 2 hands is very niche.