Advertisement
This situation serves as a stark lesson for one Sam Altman: attempting to engage in underhanded dealings after a clear refusal from the involved party may come back to haunt you, especially if that individual happens to be as legally astute as Scarlett Johansson. The recent revelation, shared by Johansson’s publicist with NPR, sheds light on the creation of “Sky,” an artificial intelligence system developed by OpenAI for ChatGPT 4.0, featuring a voice modeled after Johansson’s, without her consent.
Johansson explicitly declined Altman’s offer to voice the system in September, yet Sky was unmistakably designed with her in mind. Altman’s tweet accompanying Sky’s rollout, a simple “her,” referencing Johansson’s role in the film “Her,” further underscored the connection. Adding to the saga, Altman reached out to Johansson’s agent two days before Sky’s release, hoping for a reconsideration, yet the system went public before any further communication took place.
With legal counsel at her side, Johansson confronted Altman and OpenAI, resulting in the removal of Sky. In her statement, Johansson expressed a desire for resolution through transparency and legislative safeguards to protect individual rights in such matters.
While Johansson has yet to initiate legal action against OpenAI, her past legal battle with Disney over breach of contract regarding the release of “Black Widow” demonstrates her willingness to pursue legal recourse when necessary. In that instance, Johansson’s lawsuit, filed in 2021, highlighted Disney’s simultaneous release of the film on Disney Plus and in theaters, contrary to their agreement for an exclusive theatrical release. The lawsuit was settled in September of the same year, albeit with undisclosed terms.
For OpenAI, the message is clear: engaging in dubious practices with someone like Johansson, who has a proven track record of taking legal action when her rights are infringed upon, could lead to unwelcome legal repercussions. It would be prudent for OpenAI to heed Johansson’s call for transparency and legislative safeguards to avoid finding themselves on the receiving end of yet another legal battle.