'A tech firm stole our voices - then cloned and sold them'

In a surprising turn of events, a couple from New York City, Paul Skye Lehrman and Linnea Sage, have taken legal action against a tech company called Lovo. They claim that Lovo has unlawfully taken their voices, created AI clones of them, and sold these clones without their permission. This situation has become personal for Paul and Linnea, who are both voice-over performers. They were driving in their car when they heard a podcast discussing the potential impact of artificial intelligence on jobs in Hollywood. To their shock, they heard an AI chatbot speaking in a voice that sounded just like Paul’s. 'We needed to pull the car over,' Paul recalled. 'The irony that AI is coming for the entertainment industry, and here is my voice talking about the potential destruction of the industry, was really quite shocking. ' After this unsettling experience, they spent hours online and discovered that their voices had been cloned and sold on Lovo's platform. Linnea expressed her disbelief, saying, 'I was stunned. I couldn't believe it. ' They believe that Lovo has sold their voices possibly hundreds of thousands of times, and they are determined to seek justice.

The couple alleges that Lovo was able to recreate their voices through deceptive means. According to Lovo's co-founder, Tom Lee, the company's voice-cloning software only requires a user to read about 50 sentences to create an accurate clone. In their lawsuit, Paul and Linnea claim that Lovo obtained recordings of their voices under false pretenses. They say that anonymous employees from Lovo contacted them through Fiverr, a popular freelance platform, where they were offering their voice-over services. Linnea was approached first in 2019 and was asked to record generic-sounding test radio scripts. She was told that the recordings would be used for research purposes only and was paid $400 for her work. Later, Paul received a similar request and was paid $1200 for his recordings. They believed they were helping with a legitimate research project, but now they feel deceived.

The lawsuit filed by Paul and Linnea in May claims that Lovo used their voice recordings to create copies that compete with their real voices, all without their consent or proper compensation. This case is significant as it could set a precedent for other artists who feel their work is being exploited. Professor Kristelia Garcia, an expert in intellectual property law, explained that the case may revolve around rights of publicity, which protect individuals from unauthorized use of their voice or image. She also noted that there could be a breach of contract regarding the licenses Paul and Linnea granted to the anonymous user who commissioned the recordings. 'Licences are permission for a very specific and narrow use,' she stated. 'That would exceed the terms of the licence. ' Regardless of the outcome, this case highlights the growing concerns artists have about the impact of AI on their livelihoods. Paul and Linnea are worried about the future of their careers and the implications of AI on creative work. 'This whole experience has felt so surreal,' Linnea said. 'When we thought about artificial intelligence, we were thinking of AI folding our laundry and making us dinner, not pursuing human beings’ creative endeavors.