Animation and AI

[Natalie Sinead]

And in terms of AI more broadly -- do "we" really want Bill, Pat, Jon and "our" other absent "Who" friends' voices saying original statements and dialogue in productions or commercial advertisements and especially PSAs/PIFs/documentaries for social and political causes that the real men and women would never have agreed to perform or support?

[George D]

Jun 16, 2024 15:11:47 GMT Natalie Sinead said:

And in terms of AI more broadly -- do "we" really want Bill, Pat, Jon and "our" other absent "Who" friends' voices saying original statements and dialogue in productions or commercial advertisements and especially PSAs/PIFs/documentaries for social and political causes that the real men and women would never have agreed to perform or support?

I don't know, but as bf is already recasting then I'm curious if ai could make it sound like them

[John Wall]

Who owns the intellectual property?

[richardwoods]

This thread sums up the issue with AI. How do you limit it’s application.

This is just a personal view, using AI to restore something damaged or lost is absolutely fine, however in my opinion using AI to create something completely new impersonating someone living or dead is completely wrong.

Just look at the AI creation of something that sounds like Steve Marriott singing Georgia on my mind and the upset and division it has caused for & between his surviving family members.

[Natalie Sinead]

As consumers and citizens, it's important to remain vigilant and critical of media content, especially when it involves the representation of individuals who are no longer able to speak for themselves. Advocating for ethical standards and transparency in the use of emerging technologies can help mitigate potential misuse and protect the integrity of individuals' legacies.

[Richard Develyn]

Jun 17, 2024 10:22:14 GMT richardwoods said:

This thread sums up the issue with AI. How do you limit it’s application.

This is just a personal view, using AI to restore something damaged or lost is absolutely fine, however in my opinion using AI to create something completely new impersonating someone living or dead is completely wrong.

Just look at the AI creation of something that sounds like Steve Marriott singing Georgia on my mind and the upset and division it has caused for & between his surviving family members.

Just a thought experiment, because I'm not sure how I feel about this myself, but how would you have felt if that film, "Darkest Hour", for example, had been produced using an AI version of Winston Churchill as opposed to an actor playing Winston Churchill?

Richard

[Natalie Sinead]

And to illustrate, this was and will always be a much better option if a show or a promo wants to use Carol Anne the *character* than using AI to puppet Miss Always 12:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKcM5n55vAY

[richardwoods]

Jul 8, 2024 15:42:29 GMT Richard Develyn said:

Jun 17, 2024 10:22:14 GMT richardwoods said:

This thread sums up the issue with AI. How do you limit it’s application.

This is just a personal view, using AI to restore something damaged or lost is absolutely fine, however in my opinion using AI to create something completely new impersonating someone living or dead is completely wrong.

Just look at the AI creation of something that sounds like Steve Marriott singing Georgia on my mind and the upset and division it has caused for & between his surviving family members.

Just a thought experiment, because I'm not sure how I feel about this myself, but how would you have felt if that film, "Darkest Hour", for example, had been produced using an AI version of Winston Churchill as opposed to an actor playing Winston Churchill?

Richard

Mmm, not sure at all about using AI reconstruction of a public figure in “faction” . I think the whole point about actors playing a real person is if they can make them live without actually being them. The best example I can think of is the controversial BBC4 play The Curse of Steptoe, the acting was so good I felt that I could actually forget that I wasn’t watching Harry H Corbett & Wilfred Brambell. Also the controversial aspects of the play that caused distress to the family of, from memory, Harry H Corbett would have seemed even worse to them if they had been somehow reconstructed by AI.

[Natalie Sinead]

Jun 17, 2024 8:44:56 GMT John Wall said:

Who owns the intellectual property?

And what about actors/entertainers/musicians who were murdered or died of the disease of addiction or by suicide or just died young by pure chance?

(Marilyn Monroe, Sharon Tate, John Lennon, Judith Barsi, Jonathon Brandis et al)

[John Wall]

Jul 9, 2024 6:49:15 GMT Natalie Sinead said:

Jun 17, 2024 8:44:56 GMT John Wall said:

Who owns the intellectual property?

And what about actors/entertainers/musicians who were murdered or died of the disease of addiction or by suicide or just died young by pure chance?

(Marilyn Monroe, Sharon Tate, John Lennon, Judith Barsi, Jonathon Brandis et al)

Yep.

Copyright varies by country. I believe things like Mickey Mouse are now coming out of copyright.

[mattbarker]

There was an interesting article about this kind of thing centered on the problems around Einstein's image and American law:

www.theguardian.com/media/2022/may/17/who-owns-einstein-the-battle-for-the-worlds-most-famous-face

It has all the arguments people have given. It all starts off with good intentions - protecting the dead person's reputation - but sadly descends in to money. I still wince when I see the Einstein smart meter advert with the copyright statement at the bottom of the screen.

[George D]

There's a lot above my pay grade here to understand

There used to be a 1980s presidents day commercial where pictures of Abe and George would move their lips and sing..

"Happy birthday dear George
Happy Birthday dear Abe
It's presidents day at Harrods
So come in and save"

On one side, if a family owns a trademark then they should have those rights preserved( however I also question unlimited copyrights)

Also, there are people in the legal system who try to exploit potential loopholes in the law for their personal profit .

Happy birthday was one of them and fortunately they were exposed. Mainly because someone with the resources was able to challenge the exploitation.

time.com/3976577/happy-birthday-copyright-history/

With the Einstein situation, if there is a legitimate copywrite, then that should be respected. But suing other usages, such as Einstein being a generic name, the less protection for public figures, protected parody, and using people who could look similar, I question its appropriateness

Also, when an actor is paid to do a role and becomes associated with it( like troughton or Louie prima) it is difficult to create new king louie or second Dr stories without some sort of correlation to the actor who was paid to create the character

Perhaps when Alive we have rights to our likeness. James Earl Jones was paid a lot to give Disney an ai Vader voice.


sometimes memories of characters and people disappear because copyright has kept them from the next generation . Maybe the greatest legacy is to be remembered.

After the actors death, if there are licenses owned by family, they should be respected but beyond that, perhaps,as there's more freedom with public figures, respect should be used.

Regrettably the legal system appears less focused on justice and more towards money.

[Natalie Sinead]

Again, people like Darla Hood or James Dean or John Lennon or Judith Barsi or Carl "Alfalfa" Switzer should not be AI recreated - especially to say or perform things the real people would have never agreed to to say or do.

[johngrundy]

This is a tricky one with Star Wars here. Any film (Rogue One) and series (Andor Season 2) that is set around the Death Star being constructed and tested out on a planet (i.e. blow it up) must feature Grand Moff Tarkin, since he plays a large part in these events. To have any actor other than 'the late great Peter Cushing' recreating the role might seem disrepectful. Surely an accurate-as-possible AI version - with the blessing of his estate - is preferable to a living actor who looks nothing like him doing an imitation performance?

I feel the same way with Dr Who. For me, any actor who has tried to pass off as Hartnell or Troughton in the role of Dr Who has made a fair fist of it in the past, but has fallen short. These one-of-a-kind actors simply cannot be imitated - as with Cushing. Therefore, I would welcome AI versions in reconstructions. These renditions would at least be lip synching what is already laid-down on the audio track?

[Natalie Sinead]

Moffat has a point about AI not being able to truly replicate Troughton's skills and comic timing.