Skyrim voice actors speak out against porn mods using their AI generated voices

[27X]

7 minutes ago, Varithina said:

 

Part of the issue seems to be people were paid to voice a set script for a game, that was not porn, their voices are now being synthesised and used in porn, I can easily see their point, or are people saying that somebodies voice does not belong to them, and because we can now synthesise somebodies voices to match the original person voice we can do what we want with that, nope, no you can not, just the same as you can only post their pictures if they give permission or are in a public location, or a location where permission has been given, it probably will end up blocked into the intellectual copyright type of stuff, or in the photo and media side of the laws sooner or later, I am just wondering how messy things will get before it gets sorted out though.

 

It doesn't belong to them. Period. They do not receive royalties and they do not retain the rights. Bethesda does. The legal definition of their performance is a literal, legal product.

 

The reason the original Bayonetta VA got her shit kicked in is she tried is the same exact argument this dude is using on twitter, and professionally speaking, none of it stands, period. It is art; it is also commercial art, used for a product, and she retains exactly zero rights after the fact. No VA has control of what happens to their voice on someone else's hard drive, period.

 

No one had a problem for 50 years until now on after-product vocal work in an interactive environment and now that same work is problematic according to a sex negative holier than thou puritan and a voice actor that literally brought her "not getting paid for this" as her initial argument, which tells you exactly where her actual concerns were.

 

A modder should respect the artist wishes if applicable, but just like a photo reference or second party look/sound alike, they are under no obligation to; just like Nexus should be a total bro to modders, but fuck that gimme your money and potential earnings cause fuck you got mine.

 

and the VAs wonder why modders aren't paying attention.

 

Conundrum.

[DocClox]

11 minutes ago, Alessia Wellington said:

How are you going to copyright your voice? And what if you hire a voice actor whose voice sound indistinguishable from the original VA's voice?

 

You'd probably have more luck trademarking it, or something of that nature. Then someone would use a voice that started similar, lawsuits ensue, and  eventually the courts decide how to settle the issue.

[Alessia Wellington]

4 minutes ago, DocClox said:

You'd probably have more luck trademarking it, or something of that nature.

 

And waste a big portion of your income on an army of lawyers.

[DocClox]

26 minutes ago, Alessia Wellington said:

 

And waste a big portion of your income on an army of lawyers.

 

Well, the folks who are likely to do that are the ones who can afford to defend their claims. If you're a struggling VA who#s having problems meeting the bills, you're better off crying "foul!" on Twitter...

[espguy]

Honestly this is temporary at best and complaining about it will make  the situation worse for VA in the future. Its only a matter of time until Voice AI generation becomes advanced enough to be able to create completely new voices instead of imitating them. Lets say Voice actors make too much of a fuss and modders stop using making use of AI voices. then Good artificial voices come and modders decide that if they cant use AI imitations theyll just revoice the characters with the new voice for free replacing all lines and adding the new ones. Then companies will see people revoicing the characters with fully AI voices and say that people use those mods because they prefeer AI voices and stop hiring voice actors bc they can use an AI for that. 

[DocClox]

21 minutes ago, espguy said:

Then companies will see people revoicing the characters with fully AI voices and say that people use those mods because they prefeer AI voices and stop hiring voice actors bc they can use an AI for that. 

 

Companies will do that anyway. The minute AI generated voices are faster and cheaper to use than human beings, the VA profession is going to shrink dramatically.

 

Expect studios to try and somehow "patent" various voice types so they freeze out smaller operators with swinging royalty demands, much like music rights holders shut down indie films if there's a fragment of a tune to which they hold the rights. Mark my words, someone is going to try and monetize this before the dust settles.

 

If there are VAs out there who *don't* dream of going professional, you could perhaps do worse than declare your voice as public domain. Then modders and indie film and animation projects will always be able to use your voice, and you can't be sued in the future by some rights-holder for infringing on one of their properties.

 

Just a thought.

Edited July 11, 2023 by DocClox

[sweforce]

Fully synthetic voices would essentially eradicate voice actors in animation and I expect there to be AI software to autosync speech and speech animation. Such software may already exist for what I know.

[Metro Station]

...sorry, but if someone is interested in this, they will translate it for themselves and in such a way... that they can understand it according to their own ideas. Although it may be... what is being said is essentially different and disparate...

 

Ami engem illet... 

Én kifejezetten örülnék, ha a hangom közismerten terjedne és szinte még a csapból is ez hallatszana. 

Azonban az enyém... Nem rádió-tv műsorhoz illő... A lehető legnagyobb sajnálatomra. (bár..  lehet, de hihetetlenül korlátozott a lehetőség)

Mindamellett... A nyelvemen lényegében már NINCS OLYAN HANGSZINÉSZ aki a "bárhogyan" formát mellőzve tisztességesen hozzá tudna járulni a magyar nyelvi kultúrához.

--- és még mielőtt a "X" műhely, stúdió, bt, kft... bármi... képviseletében meg(fel)szólalna bárki: Nem, Nem értek egyet a véleményével és a "mundérvédő monológgal".

--- hallottam és ismerem olyan "műhely" munkáját, ahol a fordítás és az értelmezés "félrecsúszott"... nem éppen az eredeti elképzelés szerinti. 

--- kifejezetten káros az efféle attrakció terjesztése és bár kitudja... ingyenes(?) munka? Talán azért... a kivitelezés sem éri el a tisztességes színvonalat.

Az utóbbi 15-20-35 évben a magyar nyelv a mélypont felé indult monoton meneteléssel és ez a mélységi utazás a nemzet egészét érinti... jól láthatóan és szinte "megfoghatón".

Az okok... Bárki által megismerhetők habár nem biztos, hogy akárki számára felismerhető!

Mindenki olyan, mint az oktatása... A környezete. A... MUNKÁJA!?

Magunk választjuk mit teszünk és azt hogyan.

 

A cikk...

Amikor a kávéfőző jogot kap és törvény határoz a szavazati lehetőségéről az marad a kérdés: ezt hogyan teheti meg vagy ki fogja kisegíteni a megtételében!?

Így a jog elcsúszik mert egy másik szabályt kell szülni a kisegítő feladat pontos meghatározásához.

Aztán... Megint egy másikat ami a dolgokat és eseményeket szabályozza és meghatározza, keret építve külalakot formáz.

Aztán egy újabb ismét majd azt fogja szabályozni, amit az előző szabályok valami formátumban kettő vagy több értelmezési eshetőséget fogalmaztak és ez kapukat épített.

A kapuk kulcsához való hozzáférést is szabályozza egy .... és így tovább. A szabályok a szabályokat szabályozva ... nem tudják mit szabályoznak.

 

A fizetés és az akadékoskodásért járó jövedelem... Ez nem más mint egy elfoglaltság amit a nép adott néhány kiemelt intellektus részére. 

Szóval a hivatali munkáért járó fizetésért páran úgy vélik, valamiféle "munkát" is kell végezni (annak ellenére, hogy néha éppen az a jó munka amikor semmit sem csinál).

 

Ha az elektronikus termékek forgalma és még a tevékenysége is szabályozás alá kerül, akkor valaki elmondhatja, nem "haszontalanul" foglalja az irodáját.

Ha a digitális "termékek" és MI kerül szabályok közé... az lehetséges, hogy megnyomja a fejlődés árnyas oldalát. Lehet ez is egyféle célja valamelyik hivatalnokfélének...

Ha az MI használatát és felhasználhatóságát akarja szabályok közé tenni bárki... Szerintem: Nagy labdába rúg! (remélem a lábát is eltöri)

 

Ami az efféle dolgokat illeti, inkább a színvonal csökkenés mint a jogosság okozhat jelentős fejfáját. 

De a hangos film sem egyik napról a másikra és mindenféle problémáktól mentesen született...!

A programok által készített produkciók hangosításának problémája.... régi ügy. Az utcán is lehet vadész ni meg a kávézóba és a parkban megfelelő hangot.

De ... Fenn áll az a probléma amit technikának és fizetett időnek hívnak. A világot a pénz hajtja és ha valakinek haszna van a másik terhére.... AZ igenis PROBLÉMA!

 

Az emberek elfelejtették a HOBBI kifejezés lényegét és a mondandóját. Azt amit ténylegesen takar ez a szó. 

Mivel ez a valóság...

Nagyon nehéz úgy előre jutni, hogy az akadályok állítására hivatottak ne találjanak ki újabbakat és esetleg kellemetleneket...

 

Ha tennél valamit, akadnak olyanok akiknek ez nem tetszik mert így és úgy... És valóban. Nem tehet mindenki bármit! Kellenek minőségi és minősítési követelések.

Aztán... AZTÁN MEHET A MÓKA!

[Qwert_yyy]

Regarding this topic... Can anyone share voice files for Martianman686 mods ? Most of all interested in the mod with Freya. 

Perhaps there is already a place to backup such mods? Maybe we have to create a separate, hidden site on the darknet? А? Where the hell to hide from offended people and the people who indulge them.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Soldream said:

Regarding this topic... Can anyone share voice files for Martianman686 mods ? Most of all interested in the mod with Freya. 

Perhaps there is already a place to backup such mods? Maybe we have to create a separate, hidden site on the darknet? А? Where the hell to hide from offended people and the people who indulge them.

 

 

Well, I discovered the Internet Archive can host mods. I found Qaxe's Questorium there recently: https://archive.org/details/qaxes-questorium-sse-v-15-2-of-3-9480-15-1545271381.7z_202112

Edited July 21, 2023 by Wolfstorm321

[Qwert_yyy]

1 hour ago, Wolfstorm321 said:

 

 

Well, I discovered the Internet Archive can host mods. I found Qaxe's Questorium there recently: https://archive.org/details/qaxes-questorium-sse-v-15-2-of-3-9480-15-1545271381.7z_202112

 

Thank you, but unfortunately either I'm not good at searching, or these mods are not here.(

[27X]

2 hours ago, User39042 said:

The problem that nobody seems to be mentioning is that actors can claim defamation and sue LL.

 

Can you imagine the interview:

Employer: "We heard your VO Demo Reel. We liked what we heard."

Actress: "Great, I'm hired then?"

Employer: "Yes, but we'd like to make sure you can reproduce those lines." *hands actress a few lines of slurping, gurgling, and deepthroat noises*

Employer: "Read that in your best acting voice please.

Actress: "What?! That's not on my reel! What do you mean read this?!"

Employer: "Well we saw this quest mod on LL... It was pretty convincing."

Actress: "It's that damned AI. It wasn't me!"

Employer: "So... You're saying you can't replace these guttural lines?"

Actress: "Absolutely not, in fact I'm going to sue them for defamation!"

Employer: "Sigh... next!"

 

No, they can't.

 

Bethesda owns the performances and the actual dialog thereof. They also own the character the lines belong to.

[FauxFurry]

AI vocal performances are just a digital version of a celebrity impersonation. There is little that a public figure can do to legally prevent anyone from impersonating their voice unless they are directly engaged in identity theft or fraud.

[bjornk]

Can you sue someone, a comedian for instance, for imitating your voice saying some stupid or obscene shit in a show? Is impersonation, imitating a person's appearance, voice etc. a crime? How come so many Elvis impersonators for instance have gotten away with it then? If there is any legal ground for this in the law of a county, which I doubt, then these voice actors might also have a case. If not, then those voice actors better shut the fuck up, because an AI generated voice are not their voices, it's the imitation of their voices. If the AI voice says something obscene in a mod, how can these voice actors can even claim that it's their voice if they've never ever recorded something like that? And if they want to claim copyright on the training data set of the AI, I really doubt they'll be able to find any legal ground for that either.

[sweforce]

7 hours ago, bjornk said:

Can you sue someone, a comedian for instance, for imitating your voice saying some stupid or obscene shit in a show? Is impersonation, imitating a person's appearance, voice etc. a crime? How come so many Elvis impersonators for instance have gotten away with it then? If there is any legal ground for this in the law of a county, which I doubt, then these voice actors might also have a case. If not, then those voice actors better shut the fuck up, because an AI generated voice are not their voices, it's the imitation of their voices. If the AI voice says something obscene in a mod, how can these voice actors can even claim that it's their voice if they've never ever recorded something like that? And if they want to claim copyright on the training data set of the AI, I really doubt they'll be able to find any legal ground for that either.

Obvious satires are probably fine. Once the audience are unsure if it is the real thing or not, then there may be a problem. In any case, I would prefer if authors of sexmods used voice acting with permission to do so. Ask around in the modding community.

[bjornk]

5 hours ago, sweforce said:

Obvious satires are probably fine. Once the audience are unsure if it is the real thing or not, then there may be a problem.

 

I don't think there's ever been such a standard. For instance, have you ever heard a court case where a person gets sued by a famous person for impersonating said person flawlessly on a phone prank in which the victim of the prank was convinced that it was really this person? I have not. Not to mention if this was the case, it would've been a double edged sword, in other words, anyone, including actors and voice actors could get sued for impersonation.

 

Also, if it depends on how the audience perceives the voice, one could easily argue that mod users are completely aware that it's not the real voice of an actor.

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by bjornk

[Mez558]

Impersonations are very different. An Impressionist, be it comedian or singer, is clearly only doing an impersonation and is not trying to misslead people into believing they actually are that person.

It is illegal (in the UK at least) for companies to use a Celebrity sound alike/impressionist for VO on their advertisements without permission but it is apparently common for a lot of celebrity VO on adverts to be a sound alike with the Celeb getting paid for the use of their "likeness." Probably more than the actual performer

(Example of a sound alike would be O2, who have been using a sound alike for Sean Bean on their adverts for a couple decades now since they killed off Sean's character after the first year.)

 

As has been said, if it's using existing lines that are manipulated or used in another context then the rights are with Bethesda. There has been a Sexlab voice for Serana (and others but I don't know or care to look up who voices them) for years now but I've not heard of Laura Bailey seeking any damages for this.

The legal issue lies when someone trains an AI to reproduce a celebrities voice to say lines they have never been paid to read.
This story gets more traction when it's NSFW content but, like others have said, the driving force behind this for the actors themselves is they have not been/are not getting paid for this.

 

Where this case will likely fall down is that currently the Likeness laws for Celebrities and Voice Actors are based on commercial gain. If the mod is free, there is no commercial gain so I can't see them having a case against it, even if someone has clearly trained an AI using that persons voice.

There was the case of the Mod "An Idiot in Skyrim" getting taken down with threats of legal action but I believe that is more that the mod author had used content from TV and Radio shows without permission. I am not sure what rights, if any, his management would have had if the Voice had been AI generated and they had never actually used Karl's name.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by Mez558

[bjornk]

53 minutes ago, Mez558 said:

Impersonations are very different. An Impressionist, be it comedian or singer, is clearly only doing an impersonation and is not trying to misslead people into believing they actually are that person.

 

Does a mod using an AI generated voice try to mislead people into believing that it was actually voiced by a particular voice actor? If that was the case it would've indeed been fraudulent, if not that's nothing more nothing less than a very good impersonation and I don't think there's ever been a mod doing that sort of thing, and people who use these kinds of mods are perfectly aware of it. Not to mention, for most people who use the mod, the voice belongs to the character, they don't think of who the voice actor was, like at all.

 

53 minutes ago, Mez558 said:

The legal issue lies when someone trains an AI to reproduce a celebrities voice to say lines they have never been paid to read.
This story gets more traction when it's NSFW content but, like others have said, the driving force behind this for the actors themselves is they have not been/are not getting paid for this.

 

Why should they get paid if they have never read those lines? If "they use muh voice without my permission!" is their only argument, then the same should apply to an impersonator, because the process of learning how to imitate a particular voice is quite similar for a person and for an AI.

 

53 minutes ago, Mez558 said:

Where this case will likely fall down is that currently the Likeness laws for Celebrities and Voice Actors are based on commercial gain. If the mod is free, there is no commercial gain so I can't see them having a case against it, even if someone has clearly trained an AI using that persons voice.

 

An impersonator also uses someone else's voice for commercial gain.

 

The real issue here, these voice actors mistakenly believe that it's merely the qualities of their voices what make money for them, not their voice acting abilities.

This whole thing is very much like this:

- A painter paints a portrait of a model who was paid for it.

- The painter sells the portrait to some gallery, it becomes famous.

- People use AI to make variations of the now famous portrait.

- The model gets annoyed by that and tell people "Hey this is muh face and I didn't pose for that!"

Fucking ridiculous.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by bjornk

[bjornk]

17 hours ago, User39042 said:

The problem that nobody seems to be mentioning is that actors can claim defamation and sue LL.

 

Voice actors lend their voices to characters in a particular project, be it in an animation or a video game. In the context of the said project, the voice belongs to the character, not to the voice actor. The voice actor has absolutely no grounds to claim any sort of defamation in that context (e.g. a mod for the project in question), the character could do it, unless they are fictional (i.e. non existent).

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by bjornk

[BAB PEEG]

ok

[Mez558]

2 hours ago, bjornk said:

 

Does a mod using an AI generated voice try to mislead people into believing that it was actually voiced by a particular voice actor? If that was the case it would've indeed been fraudulent, if not that's nothing more nothing less than a very good impersonation and I don't think there's ever been a mod doing that sort of thing, and people who use these kinds of mods are perfectly aware of it. Not to mention, for most people who use the mod, the voice belongs to the character, they don't think of who the voice actor was, like at all.

 

I think you're missing the point. Actors or Voice Actors make their living reading lines. If you have created a likeness of their voice and are using it for commercial gain then they are owed compensation. I never said anything about defamation, this is only about using something you don't have the rights to for financial gain without paying for it, in this case it is the actors likeness.

 

2 hours ago, bjornk said:

Why should they get paid if they have never read those lines? If "they use muh voice without my permission!" is their only argument, then the same should apply to an impersonator, because the process of learning how to imitate a particular voice is quite similar for a person and for an AI.

 

If the impersonator is doing a voice over for something that is using an actors likeness, i.e. their voice, and there is nothing about it to make you aware or believe it is not the actor or celebrity in question then yes, that would be against the law. Again, the law suggests that only if there is commercial gain involved.
A Celebrity's likeness is basically their I.P. and if their only claim to fame is being famous then it is pretty much all they have.

As you brought up defamation, if an impersonator was to, as in your example, take or make a phone call pretending to be someone else and make slanderous or defamatory comments about themselves or another then whomever they were pretending to be probably has a good case to sue. Whether they would win I have no idea, not sure of that precedent as ever been set before.
 

2 hours ago, bjornk said:

An impersonator also uses someone else's voice for commercial gain.

 

But the content they create is their own. It's as much about what they say as it is how they say it. Watching someone read some dialogue said by Christopher Walken in Christopher Walken is not entertaining. Watching them parody Christopher Walken with their own lines or something completely out of character is (usually) entertaining.
 

2 hours ago, bjornk said:

The real issue here, these voice actors mistakenly believe that it's merely the qualities of their voices what make money for them, not their voice acting abilities.

 

So when they cast Serana or Ellie you think they just pulled names out of a Hat and we just got lucky that they pulled Laura Bailey's name out for Serana and not Ashley's?
 

2 hours ago, bjornk said:

This whole thing is very much like this:

- A painter paints a portrait of a model who was paid for it.

- The painter sells the portrait to some gallery, it becomes famous.

- People use AI to make variations of the now famous portrait.

- The model gets annoyed by that and tell people "Hey this is muh face and I didn't pose for that!"

 

Sort of, but I would say it would be closer to a Photographer doing a photoshoot of a model but an artist works too. I will stick the photographer analogy because you need multiple images from a few angles to train an AI to produce a person somewhat accurately. One painting of someone would not do that. At least not yet.

1. Photographer hires model, makeup artist, studio etc to do a photoshoot
2. The Pictures from said Photoshoot are sold to a magazine or other such media publication.
3. Person uses the images to train an AI to generate Photo Quality images of that model and sells these to a magazine.
4. The Model is annoyed because Modelling for photoshoots is how she gets paid but that work has been taken from her by someone with decent PC. The photographer is annoyed because their skills as photographer are no longer needed since an AI can replicate these and, with the right prompts, change lighting and location to suit. The studio is now concerned because who needs a studio when an AI is trained to recreate any sort of environment. And so on.

Now this only becomes a legal issue due to point 3. Where those images are sold, so there is commercial gain. If someone does this and then just posts it on Reddit etc showing off how they have trained SD or whichever AI they use to copy the photographer's style and the models likeness I doubt there is anything anyone could do.

 

Also, if the person that trained a model for their AI based on the Model's images then merged the model they had created with other ai models what he would get would no longer be as accurate a likeness to the original Human Model and could probably sell those images without any legal ramifications.

It gets a bit grey when it comes someone creating porn like this. I am not certain but I think if the images are close to photo quality the Person/Model has a case even if there is no finacial gain. Unless they're a nude/porn model already then that might get thrown out.

With regards to a Voice likenes used for Free NSFW/Porn mods. I would say that the actor only really has a case if they have no previous history of doing any sort of work that simulated sex in someway then perhaps they have a case of it being defamatory.

From what I have heard (and that was a while ago, I admit) AI generated Voice Packs are not there yet. They still sound a little clunky and CG but that will change. It may have already.
 

Edited July 22, 2023 by Mez558

[bjornk]

35 minutes ago, Mez558 said:

I think you're missing the point. Actors or Voice Actors make their living reading lines. If you have created a likeness of their voice and are using it for commercial gain then they are owed compensation.

"Likeness of their voice" does not mean it's their voice, that's the point you're missing. In fact, if you put voice samples through a sound analysis program you could probably see that there's a clear difference, despite the perceived "likeness". If it was indeed their voice, in other words, something that they have read and recorded is being used without permission, then you may have been correct.

 

43 minutes ago, Mez558 said:

If the impersonator is doing a voice over for something that is using an actors likeness, i.e. their voice, and there is nothing about it to make you aware or believe it is not the actor or celebrity in question then yes, that would be against the law. Again, the law suggests that only if there is commercial gain involved.

Mods using an AI generated voice don't try to persuade people that it's actually the voice actor's voice and make money out of it.

 

58 minutes ago, Mez558 said:

A Celebrity's likeness is basically their I.P. and if their only claim to fame is being famous then it is pretty much all they have.

"Likeness" is completely subjective, not everyone perceives things similarly, therefore likeness cannot be treated as form of intellectual property. You'd probably need something more solid than likeness to claim something as your IP. Otherwise two twins who are annoyed with each other might attempt to take things to the court.

 

1 hour ago, Mez558 said:

As you brought up defamation

 

I didn't, it was in reply to someone else's post.

 

1 hour ago, Mez558 said:

if an impersonator was to, as in your example, take or make a phone call pretending to be someone else and make slanderous or defamatory comments about themselves or another then whomever they were pretending to be probably has a good case to sue. Whether they would win I have no idea, not sure of that precedent as ever been set before.

 

That's perhaps your opinion, but laws aren't universal, what is considered a freedom in one country, can get you in jail in another or vice versa.

 

1 hour ago, Mez558 said:

But the content they create is their own. It's as much about what they say as it is how they say it.

 

I don't think that is any different in a mod dialogue voiced by AI.

 

1 hour ago, Mez558 said:

So when they cast Serana or Ellie you think they just pulled names out of a Hat and we just got lucky that they pulled Laura Bailey's name out for Serana and not Ashley's?

 

Do you think if Laura Bailey was just a random person taken from the street, she could've done an equally good job? They are employed because they have voice acting skills that a random person doesn't have even he or she they had the same identical voice.

 

1 hour ago, Mez558 said:

Sort of, but I would say it would be closer to a Photographer doing a photoshoot of a model but an artist works too. I will stick the photographer analogy because you need multiple images from a few angles to train an AI to produce a person somewhat accurately. One painting of someone would not do that. At least not yet.

1. Photographer hires model, makeup artist, studio etc to do a photoshoot
2. The Pictures from said Photoshoot are sold to a magazine or other such media publication.
3. Person uses the images to train an AI to generate Photo Quality images of that model and sells these to a magazine.
4. The Model is annoyed because Modelling for photoshoots is how she gets paid but that work has been taken from her by someone with decent PC. The photographer is annoyed because their skills as photographer are no longer needed since an AI can replicate these and, with the right prompts, change lighting and location to suit. The studio is now concerned because who needs a studio when an AI is trained to recreate any sort of environment. And so on.

 

In your analogy, neither the model nor the photographer has any right to demand more cause they've already been paid for their work, unless they signed a contract for royalties and such. Whoever owns the rights for those photographs, in this case it's most likely the media publication who bought it from the photographer, has the right to pursue legal action against the magazine, if they can prove their claim that is. In any case, the model which is what we're discussing in this thread, has no ground to ask anything from the person who generated AI images.

 

 

[bjornk]

These voice actors probably compare the AI generated voices to deepfakes because in their self-centered mentality, they arrogantly assume that everyone who plays the games they worked on knows them by name, associates the voice with them as a real life person, and appreciates their work and their skills and so on. In reality however the majority of people who play these games and mods have no idea who they are and they don't give a fuck either. The only reason why mod makers use the AI generated voices is to add new voiced dialogues to the fictional characters in the game voiced by these voice actors. They do it out of necessity cause it wouldn't make any sense to use someone else's voice for the same character or leave it silent. The intention of use is completely different than a deepfake. When these voice actors hear the AI generated NSFW voices they naturally think "Oh, that's me!", whereas for everyone who plays the game it's the fictional character.

 

[NickNozownik]

Looks like another group of people trying to make extra money, like looking for someone to sue or starting a pity party in hopes of getting easy cash. Who knows, maybe they are dumb and delusional enough to think that people who use those mods will say "Oh it's that famous glorious 500IQ best actor ever telling me to suck his dick in a porn mod! I can't believe he voice acted this!".

[Asrienda]

The actual contempt some people here are showing towards VAs is worrying