'A TECH FIRM STOLE OUR VOICES - THEN CLONED AND SOLD THEM'

The Core Issue

Voice cloning technology has rapidly advanced, raising significant ethical and legal questions regarding its use. Paul Skye Lehrman and Linnea Sage, both voice-over artists, allege that their identities have been exploited by a tech company, Lovo, which cloned their voices without consent.

• Details of the couple’s shocking discovery
• The legal implications surrounding voice cloning
• The broader impact on creative professionals

This article delves into how emerging technologies pose risks to personal and intellectual property, emphasizing the urgent need for regulation in the field of artificial intelligence.

Top Trending AI Automation Tools This Month

In today's fast-paced world, leveraging AI automation tools has become essential for enhancing productivity and efficiency. Here are some of the top trending tools that are making waves this month:

• Lazy
• Make
• n8n
• Reply

THE AI CLONING PHENOMENON

Paul Skye Lehrman and Linnea Sage allege that their voices were seized and transformed into AI-generated clones without their consent. In June 2023, while driving in New York City, they stumbled upon a podcast discussing the ramifications of AI in the entertainment industry, only to be taken aback when they heard an AI chatbot mimicking Mr. Lehrman's voice.

"We had to pull over," he recalled. "The irony of AI threatening the entertainment sector while my voice described its potential downfall was profoundly shocking."

Intrigued and alarmed, the couple spent the evening online searching for answers, eventually discovering the text-to-speech service Lovo. Ms. Sage soon found that copies of her own voice were also available.

"I was in disbelief," she admitted. "A technology company has appropriated our voices, created AI replicas, and sold them potentially hundreds of thousands of times."

In reaction, they have initiated legal action against Lovo, which has not yet issued a response to their lawsuit or to inquiries from the BBC.

UNDERSTANDING Lovo'S VOICE CLONING

Questions arise regarding how Lovo was able to replicate their voices. The couple claims this was done through misleading means.

Voice Cloning Technology

Lovo’s co-founder, Tom Lee, has previously stated that the company's voice-cloning software requires just around 50 sentences read by a user to craft a strikingly accurate clone.

• Captures tone and character: The technology can replicate the unique qualities of an individual's voice.
• Includes accents: It is capable of mimicking various accents and speech patterns.

The couple's lawsuit outlines their belief that Lovo obtained their recordings fraudulently. According to their claims, anonymous employees from Lovo approached them to record audio files through Fiverr, a well-known freelance platform where they were marketing themselves for audio work for various media forms including television and video games.

The timeline of events includes:

1. In 2019, Ms. Sage received a request to record generic test radio scripts, which are typically used internally for focus groups or as placeholders.
2. She completed the task and received $400 (£303) for her efforts.
3. Approximately six months later, Mr. Lehrman was also solicited to record generic radio advertisements.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

The couple's lawsuit, filed in May, contends that Lovo leveraged recordings of their voices to develop clones that compete unlawfully with their original voices. They assert that the company acted without authorization or fair compensation.

• Class action lawsuit: The couple hopes to attract additional claimants to support their case, though they have yet to find any.

Legal expert Professor Kristelia Garcia from Georgetown University indicates that the core of the case may focus on "rights of publicity," a segment of US law concerning the commercial use of one’s identity.

“Licenses permit a specific and limited use. For instance, giving someone permission to use my swimming pool for one afternoon doesn’t authorize them to throw a party at any time,” she explained to the BBC. “That would go beyond the license's terms.”

Regardless of the lawsuit's outcome, it adds to the ongoing series of legal battles initiated by artists, authors, and musicians striving to retain control over their creative output and financial stability.

For Mr. Lehrman and Ms. Sage, the uncertainties surrounding their future are already materializing.

"This entire situation feels so surreal," Ms. Sage expressed. "When we considered AI, we imagined it doing mundane tasks like laundry or cooking, not encroaching on human creativity."

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the AI Cloning Phenomenon?

The AI Cloning Phenomenon refers to the incident where voice-over artists Paul Skye Lehrman and Linnea Sage allege that their voices were seized and transformed into AI-generated clones without their consent. They discovered this situation in June 2023 when they heard an AI chatbot mimicking Mr. Lehrman's voice while listening to a podcast.

2. How does Lovo's voice cloning technology work?

Lovo’s co-founder, Tom Lee, states that their voice-cloning software requires the user to read approximately 50 sentences to produce a remarkably accurate voice clone. Key aspects of the technology include:

• Captures tone and character: It replicates the unique qualities of an individual's voice.
• Includes accents: The system can also mimic various accents and speech patterns.

3. How did Lehrman and Sage's voices end up in Lovo's system?

The couple claims that their voices were obtained through misleading means. They allege that anonymous employees from Lovo contacted them on Fiverr, a freelance platform, to record audio files under false pretenses. Specifically, Ms. Sage recorded generic test radio scripts in 2019, and Mr. Lehrman recorded generic radio advertisements approximately six months later.

4. What legal actions have Lehrman and Sage taken?

The couple has initiated a lawsuit against Lovo in May 2023, claiming that the company unlawfully used their recordings to create clones that compete with their original voices. They argue that Lovo acted without authorization or fair compensation.

5. What are the key legal implications of their lawsuit?

The lawsuit raises significant issues regarding the rights of publicity, which deal with the commercial use of one’s identity. Legal expert Professor Kristelia Garcia highlights that licenses allow for very specific uses, and using someone's voice without consent may violate these terms.

6. What are the potential outcomes of the lawsuit?

The outcome of the lawsuit could set a precedent for how voice cloning technology is regulated and the rights individuals have over their voices. It may also influence future legal battles as artists strive to control their creative output.

7. How do Lehrman and Sage feel about the situation?

Both Lehrman and Sage express feelings of disbelief and surrealism regarding their circumstances. Ms. Sage stated, "When we considered AI, we imagined it doing mundane tasks like laundry or cooking, not encroaching on human creativity."

8. Have there been other similar legal cases in the past?

Yes, the lawsuit filed by Lehrman and Sage is part of an ongoing series of legal battles initiated by various artists, authors, and musicians who are advocating for control over their creative work and financial stability in the age of AI-generated content.

9. What should consumers know about voice cloning technologies?

Consumers should be aware that voice cloning technologies can easily replicate voices with minimal input, raising ethical concerns about consent and representation. This emphasizes the importance of securing permission before using someone’s voice for commercial purposes.

10. What is the public reaction to such technologies?

The public response has been mixed, with many expressing concern over the ethical implications and potential misuse of voice cloning technologies. The situation involving Lehrman and Sage has sparked discussions about AI's impact on the entertainment industry and creative professions.