> Indirect involvement can still be ok within the confines of a license agreement for using the actor's voice.
This assumes existence of a license agreement or likeness/right of publicity law that prevents unauthorized use. But this is far from the case.
Companies have shown willingness to use actors’ voices to create synthetic voices without permission, compensation, or regard for their livelihoods. [1][2][3]
Of course we need laws in place to require such licensing. The fact that people are having their voice stolen now does not mean that there should never be a case where a voice can legally be cloned and used by a third party.
Precisely. We must recognize this as a fundamental issue of workers’ rights and personal autonomy in the digital age, beyond viewing it as a technical challenge. Without proper protections, voice cloning technology risks concentrating power in large companies and undermining creative workers’ economic security.
