Famous voices are set to take on a new, digital life - courtesy of AI technology. ElevenLabs, an audio startup that generates incredibly realistic synthetic speech, has launched an "Iconic Voices" marketplace where companies can license AI versions of well-known voices for ads and other content.
Living legends like actors Matthew McConaughey and Michael Caine are among the first to have signed on, with McConaughey even planning to use his digital voice to translate his newsletter into Spanish. Meanwhile, historical figures such as Judy Garland and James Dean are also set to lend their voices to AI-generated audio.
But behind this seemingly innocuous development lies a complex web of ethics and ownership rights. Franz Kafka's story serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of posthumous creative control, with his literary executor Max Brod having largely ignored Kafka's wishes for burning his unpublished work after his death. Today, artists like Caine argue that such decisions should be made explicitly by the creatives themselves, while estate lawyers and family councils will need to navigate these new territories.
As AI-generated voices become increasingly sophisticated, questions arise about who holds the power to control their use - the artist's estate, a board of directors, or even chance decision-makers. The stakes are high, with voices that were once the exclusive domain of humans now potentially being used for anything from advertisements to holographic performances.
In an effort to mitigate concerns, ElevenLabs has established a system where the rights holders of deceased figures are compensated. However, critics argue that this doesn't address the core issue - the commercialization of the posthumous voice as a commodity.
Ultimately, it's up to those in creative fields to establish clear guidelines and agreements about how they want their voices treated after death. As we navigate this brave new world of AI-generated audio, one thing is certain: the line between human expression and artificial mimicry has never been more blurred.
Living legends like actors Matthew McConaughey and Michael Caine are among the first to have signed on, with McConaughey even planning to use his digital voice to translate his newsletter into Spanish. Meanwhile, historical figures such as Judy Garland and James Dean are also set to lend their voices to AI-generated audio.
But behind this seemingly innocuous development lies a complex web of ethics and ownership rights. Franz Kafka's story serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of posthumous creative control, with his literary executor Max Brod having largely ignored Kafka's wishes for burning his unpublished work after his death. Today, artists like Caine argue that such decisions should be made explicitly by the creatives themselves, while estate lawyers and family councils will need to navigate these new territories.
As AI-generated voices become increasingly sophisticated, questions arise about who holds the power to control their use - the artist's estate, a board of directors, or even chance decision-makers. The stakes are high, with voices that were once the exclusive domain of humans now potentially being used for anything from advertisements to holographic performances.
In an effort to mitigate concerns, ElevenLabs has established a system where the rights holders of deceased figures are compensated. However, critics argue that this doesn't address the core issue - the commercialization of the posthumous voice as a commodity.
Ultimately, it's up to those in creative fields to establish clear guidelines and agreements about how they want their voices treated after death. As we navigate this brave new world of AI-generated audio, one thing is certain: the line between human expression and artificial mimicry has never been more blurred.
I mean, it's pretty cool that AI can make voices so realistic now 
. But at the same time, I'm a bit worried about what this means for people who are gone and don't have a say in how their voice is used after they die 
. It feels like we're taking away something super personal from them. And it's not just about the voices themselves, but also how much money can be made off of them 
. I guess what bothers me most is that there aren't clear rules on this stuff yet... who gets to decide how someone's posthumous voice is used? It seems like a big mess waiting to happen 
.
. And what about the implications for historical figures? Like, if Judy Garland's voice is used in a holographic performance without her knowledge or input... it's just creepy 
. ElevenLabs trying to mitigate concerns by compensating rights holders is cool and all, but at the end of the day, it's still about the commercialization of posthumous voices 
. I think we need more conversations about how artists want their voices treated after they're gone, you know?
... but let's not forget that our lives belong to us, like it or not 
. I mean, what happens when we're gone and our digital doppelgangers start raking in the cash? It's time for creatives to think about their legacies as more than just financial assets 
) about what that means. Artists, families, and executors - let's make it clear who gets control over the mic 
. We can't let posthumous wishes get lost in translation 
...
But what's really throwing me off is that it makes me wonder who's gonna be in charge when the artists pass away? Like, do we get to decide or is it up to the estate lawyers and board of directors? 
Overall, this feels like a pretty new territory we're venturing into, and I'm not sure what the long-term consequences will be. But hey, at least it's an interesting conversation to have!