Matt Connarton Unleashed: Deepfakes

0:00 Speaker 1: There's another article here from Billboard dot com. New Senate

0:04 Speaker 1: bill could protect artists from AI deep fakes. And this

0:08 Speaker 1: is of course part of our ongoing discussions about AI.

0:13 Speaker 1: We discussed it a lot on the show, but also

0:14 Speaker 1: the music industry is having an ongoing discussion about it.

0:18 Speaker 1: And this is called the No Fakes Act, first introduced

0:22 Speaker 1: as a draft bill last October, aims to provide federal

0:25 Speaker 1: protection on one's voice and likeness for the first time.

0:30 Speaker 1: And this is something you know something about from your

0:33 Speaker 1: own experience as a state legislator.

0:35 Speaker 2: Yes, I've worked on this issue specifically.

0:38 Speaker 1: It says here. A bipartisan group of US Senators introduced

0:41 Speaker 1: the highly anticipated No Fakes Act on July thirty one,

0:44 Speaker 1: which aims to protect artists and others from AI deep

0:49 Speaker 1: fakes and other non consensual replicas of their voices, images,

0:54 Speaker 1: and likeness. If passed, the legislation would create federal intellectual

0:59 Speaker 1: property for detections for the so called right of publicity

1:02 Speaker 1: for the first time, which restricts how someone's name, image,

1:05 Speaker 1: likeness in voice can be used without consent. Currently, such

1:10 Speaker 1: rights are only protected at the state level, leading to

1:12 Speaker 1: a patchwork of different rules across the country. Unlike many

1:17 Speaker 1: existing state loss systems, the federal right, Yes, the federal

1:20 Speaker 1: right that the No Fakes Act would create would not

1:24 Speaker 1: expire at death and could be controlled by a person's

1:27 Speaker 1: heirs for seventy years after their passing. The balance personal

1:33 Speaker 1: publicity rights, I'm sorry, to balance personal publicity rights and

1:37 Speaker 1: the First Amendment right to free speech. The No Fakes

1:39 Speaker 1: Act also includes specific carve outs for replicas used in

1:44 Speaker 1: news coverage, parody, historical works, or criticism. Now, yes, yeah,

1:51 Speaker 1: tell us about your experience with the bill about JD. Salinger.

1:55 Speaker 3: Right, So this in the articles one hundred percent correct.

1:58 Speaker 3: The laws are patchwork across the nation. Here in New Hampshire,

2:02 Speaker 3: as an artist, you have the right to protect your

2:04 Speaker 3: image and your likeness until you die. The moment that

2:07 Speaker 3: you did, you have no protections anymore, nor does your family.

2:12 Speaker 3: Nobody can control that or take ownership over your likeness.

2:16 Speaker 3: It becomes fair game. So what happened in New Hampshire

2:20 Speaker 3: is JD. Salinger's family has tried to protect his image.

2:24 Speaker 3: You know, Catcher in the Rye, famous American author. And

2:30 Speaker 3: there's a place, it's like a store or something that's

2:33 Speaker 3: near where the Salinger family. It has been in New

2:36 Speaker 3: Hampshire and they put JD. Salinger's face on toilet paper

2:41 Speaker 3: something wasn't too happy about that.

2:43 Speaker 2: I don't blame him, but.

2:44 Speaker 3: They were putting dad's face on things that weren't very

2:46 Speaker 3: respectable and they weren't happy about it, and they wanted

2:49 Speaker 3: to have control over their dad's image. But New Hampshire

2:52 Speaker 3: law didn't allow it. So the effort was to change

2:54 Speaker 3: the law to allow that to happen, because it does

2:57 Speaker 3: exist in many, many, many other states. California, it's a

3:01 Speaker 3: hundred years, so it's that patchwork. So what I say years,

3:05 Speaker 3: I'm talking about when you die, so you are you

3:09 Speaker 3: are a public persona you Matt Connorton on this show.

3:15 Speaker 3: In theory, you would have the ability to control your

3:18 Speaker 3: image up until the point that you die. In some states,

3:22 Speaker 3: when you die, whoever is your bequeathed or you're next

3:26 Speaker 3: to kin has the right to continue that control over

3:29 Speaker 3: your image, your likeness, your voice for a certain amount

3:32 Speaker 3: of time. In legislature, it's usually been around lifetime, thinking

3:37 Speaker 3: basically like we want your kids and your grandkids to

3:40 Speaker 3: be able to control your image. But after that it's

3:44 Speaker 3: been enough. But still allowing for people to be criticized

3:49 Speaker 3: or be satired, so narrowing the intent of the bill

3:52 Speaker 3: of that control like it is in other states. We

3:56 Speaker 3: got a lot of pushback trying to do this, like

3:59 Speaker 3: this was a huge fight, a bigger fight than I

4:01 Speaker 3: ever thought it would be. And I did manage to

4:05 Speaker 3: get it out of committee and I almost got it

4:06 Speaker 3: passed into the law, but the Republicans on the House

4:10 Speaker 3: side would not have it and trashed it because I

4:15 Speaker 3: was in a supermajority at the time as a Republican.

4:17 Speaker 3: Mind you, they wanted industries to be able to utilize

4:21 Speaker 3: people however they wanted to. And my argument was, if

4:23 Speaker 3: you look at the New Hampshire State House, it's across

4:26 Speaker 3: the street from an adult store. So I would give

4:29 Speaker 3: the example of you know, you die and the next

4:32 Speaker 3: day your kids see your face on an adult toy

4:35 Speaker 3: in the adult store being advertised in the window.

4:38 Speaker 2: How do you feel about that? Should that be allowed?

4:41 Speaker 3: Should a pub person's image belong ownership of that image

4:46 Speaker 3: belong to the next of ken? I think it should.

4:49 Speaker 3: I believe it should. You're a public figure, you're making

4:52 Speaker 3: money off of your image, you have created a brand

4:55 Speaker 3: of you, and you should be able to becreath that

4:58 Speaker 3: brand to your next to kin. In my opinion, this

5:02 Speaker 3: law gets into that because now it has to. Now

5:05 Speaker 3: we're adding this whole new animal into the mixture of

5:08 Speaker 3: AI and the ability to mimic people, to pretend to

5:11 Speaker 3: be people, to convince people that that really is that person.

5:15 Speaker 3: These deep fakes are pretty bad, Like you really can't

5:18 Speaker 3: necessarily tell the difference between one person or another. You

5:22 Speaker 3: could take somebody's image that you love and means the

5:25 Speaker 3: world to you and have them say the most horrific

5:28 Speaker 3: things and have no control over that, or we allow

5:32 Speaker 3: that to be controlled. I think you should be able

5:35 Speaker 3: to do that, and that's what I advocated for, and

5:36 Speaker 3: that's what I fought for. Unfortunately, the bill died thanks

5:39 Speaker 3: to House Republicans because the Senate was ready to pass it.

5:43 Speaker 3: The Salinger family is very respected in New Hampshire and

5:47 Speaker 3: we usually take pride in our in our in our

5:49 Speaker 3: in the successes that come out of our state. J. D.

5:52 Speaker 3: Salander is one of the most amazing American writers that

5:56 Speaker 3: is known throughout our country and around the world for

6:00 Speaker 3: or his Fourth Catcher in the Ryan his works. So

6:04 Speaker 3: you see what I'm saying about but.

6:05 Speaker 1: It gets so these things do get complicated though, because

6:09 Speaker 1: he do. Because so this happened a few months ago

6:14 Speaker 1: and we never got to it on the show. But

6:17 Speaker 1: do you remember the Scarlett Johansson thing. Yes, it was

6:20 Speaker 1: in the news. Yes, I found an article from the

6:23 Speaker 1: Hollywood Reporter. Again, this is from a few months ago.

6:25 Speaker 1: But Scarlett Johansson's AI legal threat set stage for actors

6:30 Speaker 1: battle with tech giants. So here's what this was about. Artists.

6:35 Speaker 1: This is a little bit of a side street, but

6:37 Speaker 1: it's relevant. So artists were first to sue. Then authors

6:42 Speaker 1: hit generative artificial intelligence companies with a valley of lawsuits,

6:45 Speaker 1: followed by publications. As battle lines over the use of

6:48 Speaker 1: AI tools in Hollywood are being drawn, actors maybe the

6:51 Speaker 1: next group of creators to open another front in what

6:55 Speaker 1: would be an industry defining legal battle against AI firms

6:58 Speaker 1: over the use of copyrighted works in personal data to

7:02 Speaker 1: power their human mimicking chat bots. On Monday, and again

7:06 Speaker 1: this is from the end of May, Scarlett Johansson threatened

7:09 Speaker 1: legal action against open ai, which is who created chat gpt,

7:14 Speaker 1: for allegedly copying and limiting I'm sorry imitating her voice

7:20 Speaker 1: after she refused to license it to the company. According

7:23 Speaker 1: to the actress, Open Ai asks her to be one

7:27 Speaker 1: of the voices called Sky for its newest AI system.

7:32 Speaker 1: She declined, though she said that didn't stop chief executive

7:36 Speaker 1: Sam Altman.

7:39 Speaker 3: And that's part of it right there, like for example,

7:42 Speaker 3: sports heroes in games and making sure that they have

7:47 Speaker 3: control over that imaging and that money in a game. Yeah,

7:50 Speaker 3: so that's where this legislation.

7:53 Speaker 1: But here's here's the problem though. Well, okay, so this

7:56 Speaker 1: is what she said in her statement, and then I'm

7:58 Speaker 1: gonna play Devil's advocate as I like to do because

8:02 Speaker 1: this because I when I first heard this, I was

8:04 Speaker 1: very skeptical that she had a case. Okay, so she

8:07 Speaker 1: wrote in a statement, quote, when I heard the released demo,

8:11 Speaker 1: I was shocked, angered, and in disbelief that mister Altman

8:14 Speaker 1: would pursue a voice that sounded so eerily similar to

8:18 Speaker 1: mine that my closest friends and news outlets could not

8:22 Speaker 1: tell the difference. Unquote. Okay, here's the problem. So from

8:30 Speaker 1: her perspective, so she feels they asked her, she said no,

8:35 Speaker 1: So they just generated a voice that sounded.

8:37 Speaker 2: Well, we'll go to court and deal with it in court,

8:39 Speaker 2: but we got it.

8:40 Speaker 1: But here's the problem. What did they Does Scarlett Johanson

8:45 Speaker 1: have such a distinct voice? Is there no one else

8:48 Speaker 1: who sounds like her? I?

8:50 Speaker 3: Ah, yeah, come on, now, come on, we want you

8:54 Speaker 3: to be our voice.

8:55 Speaker 2: We want you to be a voice. No no, no

8:57 Speaker 2: no no, So we make one up that sounds just

8:59 Speaker 2: like you.

8:59 Speaker 1: Come on if I if so, if I go and

9:04 Speaker 1: hear this, am I going to say? Oh, that's Scarlett Johansson?

9:09 Speaker 3: I mean according to her, she's saying yes, she's saying

9:13 Speaker 3: that news to her. According to her, So who are

9:16 Speaker 3: these news outlets and did they really feel that way

9:19 Speaker 3: and contact her?

9:20 Speaker 2: If that is true, then she absolutely has a case.

9:24 Speaker 1: I'm very skeptical.

9:25 Speaker 3: The thing is, even even the Motion Picture Association is

9:28 Speaker 3: getting in behind this bill.

9:29 Speaker 2: And I do want to say one thing about the bill.

9:32 Speaker 3: Senator Blackburn is on it, who's a Republican, and Senator

9:35 Speaker 3: Clovisha and Senator they So this bill is bipartisan in

9:40 Speaker 3: effort to try and protect artists, athletes, people who have

9:45 Speaker 3: a public persona from being turned into some kind of

9:50 Speaker 3: an AI.

9:52 Speaker 1: Now, and you know, I'll always advocate on the side

9:56 Speaker 1: of artists at the end of the day. But I'm

9:58 Speaker 1: just saying though from a pra again from a practice

10:00 Speaker 1: and pragmatic standpoint. So if somebody sounds like you, now

10:06 Speaker 1: you can go and get suit film.

10:07 Speaker 3: If this suit, if this actually sounds a lot like her,

10:11 Speaker 3: or sounds like her period after them turn after she

10:16 Speaker 3: turned them down, that's that's not coincidental.

10:21 Speaker 2: That's not a coincidence. That's intention. But they're gonna get.

10:25 Speaker 3: What they wanted because they figure tied up in court,

10:28 Speaker 3: they get away with it.

10:29 Speaker 2: But who they get away with it?

10:31 Speaker 1: But who's to say.

10:33 Speaker 3: Unless she gets a stay of some kind and some

10:37 Speaker 3: kind of emergency injunction to stop them from using it.

10:40 Speaker 3: They're getting to utilize it while you're going through court.

10:43 Speaker 1: But so this company though, so because that conversation was

10:47 Speaker 1: had with Scarlett Johansson, now this company can never ever

10:54 Speaker 1: use any voice that might.

10:56 Speaker 2: Sound like yeah, I'm gonna say yes.

11:00 Speaker 1: See that to me sounds.

11:01 Speaker 3: If it sounds just like her, like you can't tell

11:04 Speaker 3: the difference. No, they shouldn't be able to.

11:07 Speaker 1: There's not another actor somewhere who has a voice like her.

11:12 Speaker 1: What is so distinct about her voice?

11:14 Speaker 3: If it sounds just like her and you can't tell

11:18 Speaker 3: the difference. After they went to her trying to get

11:21 Speaker 3: usage and she said, no, I don't know. We have

11:24 Speaker 3: to put some kind of limitations on AI or it

11:27 Speaker 3: will run rampant. Where is your line, Where is your

11:30 Speaker 3: line in the stand that you're protecting the artist?

11:32 Speaker 1: Yeah, but I do think there's I do think there's

11:34 Speaker 1: the uh. And this is why I bring this up.

11:36 Speaker 1: I do think there's the risk of abuse in the

11:38 Speaker 1: other direction.

11:39 Speaker 3: Man, there is, which is why this is why this Yeah,

11:43 Speaker 3: and it's why these kinds of laws are difficult to

11:45 Speaker 3: pass because you do have to narrow the scope because

11:48 Speaker 3: you still have to allow for perspective, sorry, for protected speech.

11:53 Speaker 3: You've got to allow for There's got to be you know,

11:55 Speaker 3: we have to be able to have sat tire of people.

11:57 Speaker 2: We have to be able to.

11:59 Speaker 1: Well that that's the right thing about That's a big thing.

12:02 Speaker 2: I'm worried about is part of But that's been done.

12:05 Speaker 2: It's done in many places.

12:06 Speaker 1: Because satirical works are generally protected and that's already and

12:11 Speaker 1: I'm worried about that no longer.

12:12 Speaker 3: There's a lot, but it's already been on the books

12:14 Speaker 3: for forever, especially in California, there's laws on the books

12:18 Speaker 3: that protect artists but allow for satire. California protects your

12:22 Speaker 3: image for one hundred years after your death. Some states

12:25 Speaker 3: are seventy five. New Hampshire is no time. New Hampshire

12:29 Speaker 3: is you're dead, You're done. Your family doesn't get to

12:31 Speaker 3: control it. You show up in the middle of some

12:33 Speaker 3: adult stores window too bad, too sad, don't show your kids.

12:38 Speaker 2: I don't like that.

12:40 Speaker 3: I think people should be able to control their image,

12:43 Speaker 3: their persona, and when they die that shouldn't just die

12:47 Speaker 3: with them if they you know you're you are a

12:49 Speaker 3: commodity of your own, and you've established this commodity. You

12:53 Speaker 3: get to bequeath that to whoever you wish, and they

12:56 Speaker 3: get to contain that ownership for however many years the

12:59 Speaker 3: law allows. But like our state doesn't. Our state gives

13:02 Speaker 3: no protection at awe when death happens.

13:07 Speaker 2: This law is going way, This law has to happen.

13:11 Speaker 2: This stuff has to happen.

13:13 Speaker 3: AI is exponentially growing on a daily basis. Let's face it,

13:17 Speaker 3: technology is amazing. It grows every day. There's good and

13:20 Speaker 3: bad about it. The ability to mimic someone's image, likeness, voice,

13:25 Speaker 3: there's a lot of danger involved in that. There's a

13:27 Speaker 3: lot of nasty, underground, criminal things that can be done

13:31 Speaker 3: with that, you know.

13:33 Speaker 2: I mean, I worry.

13:33 Speaker 3: About that somebody puts a video of somebody making it

13:38 Speaker 3: look like they've committed a crime, that person goes to jail.

13:41 Speaker 3: This kind of technology can be so horrifically abused that

13:46 Speaker 3: if we don't put safeguards now, it's going to be

13:50 Speaker 3: too late when it's out of the box.

13:53 Speaker 1: For all you know, I might not really be here.

13:54 Speaker 1: I could be a deep fake.

13:56 Speaker 2: Well I know, because I'm here.

13:58 Speaker 1: Oh that's true.

14:00 Speaker 2: Listeners could be listening to two deep pakes.

14:02 Speaker 1: They could be listening to an AI generated version of

14:04 Speaker 1: the show.

14:05 Speaker 2: Maybe we're not here, maybe we're in Aruba.

14:07 Speaker 1: I do want to do that sometime. I think it'd

14:09 Speaker 1: be fun make an AI generated version of the show,

14:11 Speaker 1: just to see what it comes up with. They did

14:13 Speaker 1: that once on The Howard Stern Show. It's pretty well

14:15 Speaker 1: the conversation between Howard and Robin and the AI version

14:18 Speaker 1: that they did. It was funny because it was so

14:21 Speaker 1: it was so it was like, you know, Howard's like

14:23 Speaker 1: asking Robin, Robin, how was your weekend? And Robin's like

14:27 Speaker 1: mine was good, Howard, how was you know, It's just

14:29 Speaker 1: like a conversation they would never have, but it was

14:31 Speaker 1: like it was the best that the AI could come

14:34 Speaker 1: up with.

14:35 Speaker 3: There is an organization called their Human Artistry Campaign that's

14:38 Speaker 3: out there that's actually trying to work on these issues

14:40 Speaker 3: to protect artists. We're talking about When you talk about

14:43 Speaker 3: artis you talk about everybody. We're talking about music, actors, painters, everyone.

14:50 Speaker 3: If we I'm serious, Like, so, I want to know

14:52 Speaker 3: from you, Devil's Advocate, where's your line where is it

14:58 Speaker 3: that we are protecting? Where do you put that line

15:01 Speaker 3: to protect the artists?

15:03 Speaker 1: Well, I don't know. I mean, that's that's the thing

15:06 Speaker 1: we're kind of That's what's so fascinating about the subject

15:10 Speaker 1: to me is it's it's complicated. It's it's complex, and

15:13 Speaker 1: we're kind of trying to find our way through it. Now.

15:16 Speaker 1: I do tend to be I might be lenient on

15:20 Speaker 1: a lot of this, though I might have an internal

15:23 Speaker 1: bias because so you know, I'm a co host on

15:27 Speaker 1: Retrospect and Radio with Polic on Friday nights, and one

15:30 Speaker 1: of the things that one of the uh, if you've

15:32 Speaker 1: never heard the show, every week Paul picks a different subject,

15:35 Speaker 1: and one of the subjects that we've done a few

15:37 Speaker 1: times that Paul has shows in his plagiarism where he'll

15:42 Speaker 1: play a song and then yeah, and then it's a

15:45 Speaker 1: song where there was some sort of perhaps someone said, hey,

15:49 Speaker 1: they you stole my song. I'm going to sue you,

15:51 Speaker 1: and there was litigation or the threat of litigation or

15:53 Speaker 1: just accusations of plagiarism and so forth. Led Zeppelin, by

15:56 Speaker 1: the way, the most plagiaristic band ever. But when we're

16:03 Speaker 1: when Paul plays these examples for us, I'm usually the

16:06 Speaker 1: one in the room who says not guilty. I'm like,

16:09 Speaker 1: I'm the most lenient when it comes to these accusations

16:13 Speaker 1: of plagiarism, because I'm the guy who says, yeah, I

16:16 Speaker 1: know that song sounds like this other song, but that's

16:19 Speaker 1: because it's using a chord progression that is very common

16:23 Speaker 1: in rock music and shows up in a lot of songs.

16:25 Speaker 1: I'm the most lenient one. So maybe maybe because I

16:29 Speaker 1: tend to maybe maybe I have an internal bias that's

16:32 Speaker 1: making me say, hey, let's be a little bit careful

16:35 Speaker 1: about what we assume that's different is copying something else?

16:38 Speaker 3: I want to challenge you on that. That's different because

16:40 Speaker 3: you're comparing what's coming out of a human mind to

16:44 Speaker 3: a computer pretending to be somebody else.

16:47 Speaker 1: But what is the same is this notion of copying,

16:51 Speaker 1: this notion of hearing something or reading the data of something. However,

16:57 Speaker 1: you want to think about it the way a large

16:59 Speaker 1: learning model works machine learning. The part that's similar is

17:03 Speaker 1: taking something and replicating it in some.

17:05 Speaker 3: Way, true, but without the human element. And that's that's

17:08 Speaker 3: a big difference. There's the difference between the human being

17:11 Speaker 3: and the computer.

17:14 Speaker 1: Well, but it depends on the situation, right, I mean,

17:16 Speaker 1: if I take a if I take somebody else's song

17:18 Speaker 1: and I just basically copy it and I barely change it,

17:20 Speaker 1: and I've plagiarized it, that's actually worse.

17:24 Speaker 2: Than that plagiarism not a deep fake, right.

17:27 Speaker 1: No, But I'm just saying, though, that's actually worse than

17:28 Speaker 1: if I type an AI prompt and I say make

17:31 Speaker 1: a song that kind of sounds like this.

17:33 Speaker 3: Yeah, No, that is worse because it's a direct right copyright.

17:37 Speaker 3: Who's the Who's the rapper that did that? With David

17:41 Speaker 3: Bowie's song Queen under Pressure? Who's stole from under pressure.

17:46 Speaker 3: Vanilla Vanilla ice, that's what it was. Yeah, yep, but

17:50 Speaker 3: see that's that's plagiarism. That's stealing somebody's work.

17:54 Speaker 1: Well that's not technically, it's not plagiarism. It's it's a

17:58 Speaker 1: it's ample, it's an unclear sample. Yeah, because he didn't

18:01 Speaker 1: ask permission and then he got held over a balcony

18:04 Speaker 1: by Suge Knight. It's a whole thing. Geez, we can

18:06 Speaker 1: do a whole show about vanilla Ice. What a fascinating man.

18:09 Speaker 2: This is true. Yes, but you don't want to anger anyone.

18:12 Speaker 1: No, that's true. We don't want Sugar Knight to come

18:14 Speaker 1: and hurt me.

18:15 Speaker 3: Hang you over or we do have a balcony. Yes,

18:18 Speaker 3: he could hang you over a balcony by your ankles.

18:20 Speaker 2: That would be terrible. Well, it's it's a very I mean,

18:24 Speaker 2: I support the effort. I think this bill should pass.

18:28 Speaker 2: I think it should be long.

18:29 Speaker 3: I think there should be protections against We have to start.

18:34 Speaker 3: If we don't, we're already kind of late to the

18:37 Speaker 3: late to the Gamia.

18:38 Speaker 2: We need these.

18:39 Speaker 3: Laws on the books like yesterday. Because technology grows and

18:43 Speaker 3: leaps and bounds by the day, AI especially, we don't

18:48 Speaker 3: we need we need this stuff now right, not before

18:51 Speaker 3: before it gets too far out of the bag. But

18:54 Speaker 3: you know, I'm sorry, but I still I have to

18:56 Speaker 3: disagree with you on Johansson issue. She was approached, she

19:01 Speaker 3: was asked, they wanted her, they courted her, she said no.

19:04 Speaker 3: Then they created something that sounded just like her. Yeah,

19:09 Speaker 3: I don't, I don't see.

19:10 Speaker 1: I don't even know, though, I would have to hear

19:13 Speaker 1: it and make my own determination to really have an

19:17 Speaker 1: opinion a hundred, which I have not. It's like with

19:19 Speaker 1: the George Carlin thing. Remember all these guys who made

19:24 Speaker 1: an AI version of a George Carlin album, a new

19:26 Speaker 1: George Carlin album. Yeah, And I remember I played a

19:30 Speaker 1: little bit of it on the show that and and

19:34 Speaker 1: well I ended up listening to the entire hour, and

19:37 Speaker 1: I thought it was good. I actually thought it was funny.

19:39 Speaker 1: And George Carland's one of my all time favorite Duck comedians,

19:42 Speaker 1: of course. But but I remember saying to you, Jesse

19:45 Speaker 1: was with us on the show that day, and I

19:47 Speaker 1: remember saying, my observation was, you know, yeah, it sounds

19:51 Speaker 1: a lot like him, but not exactly. And if you

19:54 Speaker 1: were to play this for me, and I'm sure it's

19:56 Speaker 1: still on YouTube. If you don't know what we're talking about,

19:58 Speaker 1: just look up George Carlin AI. You'll find it and

20:01 Speaker 1: it's actually funny, like the jokes are good. But I'm

20:04 Speaker 1: skeptical that it's all AI generated because some of those

20:08 Speaker 1: jokes don't sound like they could have been generated by AI.

20:10 Speaker 1: They're actually too clever. But but I remember saying to

20:13 Speaker 1: you and Jesse that if you, if you just played

20:15 Speaker 1: this for me and said to me, didn't tell me

20:18 Speaker 1: anything about it, and just said, Matt, who is this comedian?

20:20 Speaker 1: Do you recognize this? I might say it reminds me

20:24 Speaker 1: of George Carlin, or it kind of sounds like George Carlin.

20:27 Speaker 1: I would not say, oh, that's George Carlin.

20:29 Speaker 2: Well guess, because you know he's dead.

20:31 Speaker 1: No, no, no, But I'm just saying. I'm saying, if if,

20:33 Speaker 1: if you, if you.

20:34 Speaker 2: Just played that for me, you would have it out

20:36 Speaker 2: right away and.

20:37 Speaker 1: Tell me anything about it. I I probably would have

20:39 Speaker 1: said it reminds me of George Carlin, but I would

20:41 Speaker 1: not have said that's George Carlin because it didn't sound

20:44 Speaker 1: enough like him to me. The AI version.

20:47 Speaker 2: That's one example.

20:48 Speaker 1: It is, It's just one example. It's anecdotal, but I'm

20:51 Speaker 1: just saying I would have to hear the the Scarlett

20:55 Speaker 1: Johanson which is not which is not available. They they

21:00 Speaker 1: took it down, avoided a lawsuit, and all of that.

21:02 Speaker 1: That's all been saying.

21:03 Speaker 2: So you in favor or opposed to the legislation.

21:08 Speaker 1: I'm generally in favor of protecting artists. I don't know

21:10 Speaker 1: enough about exactly what the legislation is to really have

21:14 Speaker 1: a firm opinion, but I'm generally in favor of protecting artists.

21:18 Speaker 1: At the end of the day, I will always advocate

21:19 Speaker 1: on behalf of artists. Having said that, I'm also always

21:22 Speaker 1: worried about abuse, I will say, and frivolous lawsuits and

21:26 Speaker 1: all of that.

21:27 Speaker 3: There are a whole host of organizations that agree with you,

21:30 Speaker 3: that are representing artists. Organizations like the Nashville Songwriters' Association

21:36 Speaker 3: or the Production Music Association, the Recording Academy are all

21:39 Speaker 3: joining together in support of this bipartisan legislation, which is

21:44 Speaker 3: nice to see. I just hope that the sun doesn't

21:46 Speaker 3: sit on it forever and that they actually do get

21:48 Speaker 3: it passed into.

21:49 Speaker 2: Law sooner rather than later.

21:51 Speaker 3: To protect artists is not artists, culture, art everything needs

21:56 Speaker 3: to be protected from AI. It really does. If we

22:02 Speaker 3: don't get these laws in place now, it's just going

22:04 Speaker 3: to be too late. And I really do think there

22:07 Speaker 3: needs to be laws, and especially in regards to deep fakes,

22:13 Speaker 3: perhaps