I think there's a very big difference here in that you're equating a person singing like Steve Perry (one in millions) and a machine singing like Steve Perry (electricity required).
Because of the scale on which AI voices can be abused, the infeasibility of taking all violations of publicity rights to court, and, personal opinion, cheapens the human experience of music by creating eternal singers and encourages removing real singers from the process of music?
I expect humanity will be more benefited by having infinite amazing singers. We have to think of the benefit, not just to the harm to someone who is now vocally copied.
And I don’t think it’s harm so much as lack of lots of money.
I don’t think Adele will get paid less for her concerts and music if there are a billion Adele sounding AIs singing the news to everyone.
Agree to disagree. I think the cons outweigh the pros. Adele benefits from being an established presence in music. New singers need to be better than the musical clone army in addition to other singers to build a fan base. This just exacerbates existing problems with market saturation. For in person concerts we’ve seen what can be done with the Gorillaz and Tupac. It won’t happen overnight but I can foresee an industry of manufactured idols in the future.
Well another way to look at it is human society and its laws should tend to the needs of its citizens and the job loss implications of this and other AI tech should concern the state which likely doesn’t want a bunch of idle people dependent on the their coin purse. Some protection of human workers seems warranted. I don’t think think copyright or public rights even need to come into play.
Arbitrary or not, this technology serves companies more so than workers. It’s not clear the benefits outweigh the cost to society. The cool factor is not a compelling enough argument to allow it unrestricted. Everyone needs work, that’s a basic fact of life. We should be mindful knowing one day we will be targets of replacement.
As consumers, we should avoid supporting, where possible, commercial uses of AI voices and as citizens, support new laws that curtail their commercial use. Not sure what else can be done as people will use this stuff commercially if able and people will consume it because it exists.
It would be nice if people who lost their voice could get it back. Although he would be less iconic, speech synthesis like this could have given Stephen Hawking his voice back. That harms no one so I can see exceptions for such cases.
These are very different things.