George Carlin's estate has settled a lawsuit over a comedy special featuring an AI-generated impersonation, which will be deleted by the creators.

George Carlin‘s estate has settled a lawsuit over an AI-generated imitation of the late comedian, with the creators agreeing to remove it from their YouTube channel and podcast feed.

In January, the Dudesy podcast released “George Carlin: I’m Glad I’m Dead,” which purported to be an hour-long special created by artificial intelligence. Carlin died in 2008, but the special featured a sound-alike voice doing Carlin-esque material on contemporary topics like trans rights and defunding the police.

The estate sued, alleging that the special violated the estate’s copyrights and its publicity right to Carlin’s name, image and likeness.

  • ShdwdrgnEnglish
    132·
    9 months ago

    I feel like I want to agree with you, but on the other hand what would happen if everyone were free to use any dead celebrity’s likeness any way they wanted? Keeping in mind that Sinéad O’Connor’s estate just sued Trump for using her music without permission at a rally that goes against everything she stood for, if we weren’t allowed to keep a tight reign on these things then it would unleash some truly unspeakable horrors. For example, what if a speech from MLKJ were allowed to be twisted by white supremacists to spread hatred? It could get out of hand so quickly and the good deeds done by these people could be white-washed. I think we just need to accept certain restrictions in order to safeguard the strongest voices that speak up for the rest of us.

    • dezmd@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1516·
      9 months ago

      This was quite obviously a parody which is protected speech in the US. There is no ambiguity on this, the creation was not some pure AI generation, it was output based on the parameters set by the Dudesy guys, one of whom is well known comedian Will Sasso of MadTV fame.

      The anti-AI circlejerk crowd is leaning hard on the wrong example to attack, and the Carlin family has this all wrong.

      People don’t seem interested in thinkng beyond a knee jerk reaction against anything labeled AI.

      • FireTower@lemmy.worldEnglish
        81·
        9 months ago

        I was under the impression that it was more so a satire than a parody, which have less protection. (Key difference being one is a commentary other topics vs being a commentary on the original works) Then again I haven’t watched the full 60 minute video.

        • dezmd@lemmy.worldEnglish
          45·
          9 months ago

          Well, only based on this reply, you certainly aren’t making a case for yourself being rational and thoughtful, by taking that last line as an attack rather than a commentary on the general state of reactions on this ongoing subject of discussion.

          Put your pitchfork away. This isnt reddit, no need to instantly go with the minute of hate as a default state of reaction.

    • wagesj45@kbin.run
      79·
      9 months ago

      You shouldn’t own anything well after your death, including your likeness. By your logic we couldn’t make films about Cleopatra or use Shakespeare’s work.

      • ShdwdrgnEnglish
        73·
        9 months ago

        Hey if a fscking mouse can be copyrighted for 100 years, why shouldn’t the work of real people also be protected? Of course neither of the examples your cited would still have copyrights even under those extreme terms.

        • wagesj45@kbin.run
          8·
          9 months ago

          I don’t think the Mouse should have that copyright either. I’m not a total copyright abolitionist, but the time needs to be much shorter like patents. And I think likenesses should fall into the same category.

          • ShdwdrgnEnglish
            4·
            9 months ago

            I do actually agree with that, these lengths of times are pretty ridiculous.