When OpenAI launched its new voice assistant recently, many were impressed by its capabilities. However, Scarlett Johansson, a well-known Hollywood actress, was not among them. She felt shocked and angered because the voice of the assistant sounded remarkably like hers. This incident has sparked a conversation about the legal and ethical implications of artificial intelligence, especially in creative industries.
The Sky Voice and Scarlett Johansson
In a product demo last week, OpenAI introduced “Sky,” an AI voice that left many viewers almost doing double-takes. The voice was eerily reminiscent of Scarlett Johansson’s portrayal of the AI girlfriend, Samantha, in the 2013 movie Her. Among the viewers was Johansson herself, who was shocked by the similarities. According to a statement released later, she wasted no time in hiring legal counsel and sent letters to OpenAI demanding an explanation.
In response, OpenAI halted the use of Sky and published a blog post clarifying that the voice was not an imitation of Johansson but belonged to a different professional actress using her natural voice. Yet, the damage was done. Johansson stated that she was “shocked, angered, and in disbelief” after hearing the demo, calling the voice “so eerily similar to mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not tell the difference.”
Legal Implications
The situation gets even more interesting when you consider the legal implications. OpenAI’s sudden halt of Sky’s use and its subsequent apology from CEO Sam Altman might indicate the company’s concern about potential legal repercussions. Intellectual property experts are already weighing in. If Johansson decides to pursue a claim against OpenAI, it could focus on “right of publicity” laws, which protect people from having their name or likeness used without authorization.
John Berlinski, a partner at law firm Bird Marella and Johansson’s legal counsel, is no stranger to high-profile cases. He previously represented Johansson in her lawsuit against Disney, which settled in 2021. On the other side, OpenAI’s defence is being handled by David Kramer, a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, known for defending Google and YouTube in copyright infringement cases.
What the Experts Say
James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital and internet law at Cornell University, believes Johansson could have a good case. “You can’t imitate someone else’s distinctive voice to sell stuff,” he noted. On the flip side, Colorado law professor Harry Surden and University of Kentucky professor Brian L. Frye have their reservations. According to Surden, the resemblance might only be superficial, making any “right of publicity” claim weak. Frye also suggested that merely cloning the sound of her voice might not constitute a violation.
Jennifer E. Rothman, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, offered a valuable historical perspective. She referenced a case in the late 1980s where Bette Midler successfully sued Ford Motor Company for hiring a sound-alike singer after she turned down a commercial offer. According to Rothman, “It doesn’t matter whether a person’s actual voice is used in an imitation or not, only whether that audio confuses listeners.”
OpenAI’s Response and Public Perception
OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman initially downplayed the resemblance, stating that Sky “was never intended to resemble” Johansson. However, a curious one-word post on X.com—just “her”—by Altman on the day of the demo muddied the waters. It seemed to draw a direct line from the AI voice to Johansson’s role in Her. This left some people questioning whether OpenAI had indeed drawn inspiration from her voice despite their claims to the contrary.
Moreover, Altman’s publicized attempts to get Johansson to voice ChatGPT—first last year and again two days before the demo—did not help OpenAI’s case. This history made their insistence that Sky wasn’t meant to resemble Johansson seem less credible.
The Bigger Picture: Copyright and AI
This controversy isn’t happening in a vacuum. OpenAI is already embroiled in multiple lawsuits from artists and writers who allege that the company used their creative work to train AI models without permission. These lawsuits focus on copyright issues, but for Johansson, the likely battlefront is right of publicity, as voices aren’t protected by copyright law.
Brian L. Frye emphasized this point, stating, “It would be right of publicity. She’d have no other claims.” This adds another layer of complexity to the already intricate world of AI and intellectual property law.
Is This a Marketing Stunt?
Some observers suspect that OpenAI’s moves might be more calculated than they appear. David Herlihy, a copyright lawyer and music industry professor at Northeastern University, and Purvi Patel Albers, a partner at Haynes Boone, suggested that the controversy could be a deliberate stunt to draw attention to OpenAI. “What’s the point? I say it’s publicity,” Albers mentioned. She might not be far off—everyone is indeed talking about OpenAI now.
Final Thoughts
The saga between OpenAI and Scarlett Johansson is far from over. While it shines a spotlight on the potential legalities surrounding AI-generated content, it also highlights the ethical considerations tech companies must navigate. For now, in the court of public opinion, OpenAI seems to be on shaky ground. Whether this ordeal will serve as a cautionary tale or a clever marketing ploy remains to be seen.
What are your thoughts on this controversy? Do you think Johansson has a valid claim, or is this much ado about nothing? Drop your comments below; I’d love to hear from you!
+ There are no comments
Add yours