Siri's Hebrew Voice Sues Apple Because She Doesn't Like The Way IPhone Owners Are Using Siri
from the how-not-to-sue dept
We cover a lot of weird and pointless lawsuits here at Techdirt. This one, filed by Israeli radio broadcaster Galit Gura-Eini, is one of the weirdest. At first brush, it seems like she might have a legit legal complaint on her hands.
Israeli radio broadcaster and voice artist Galit Gura-Eini, the voice of Waze’s first female navigation directions in Hebrew, alleges that Apple has been using her voice recordings without authorization. Gura-Eini claims she was surprised to learn she was now the voice of Siri when the app launched in Hebrew in 2016. Earlier this year, Gura-Eini approached Apple requesting her voice be removed from the Siri app, but the request was denied.
But things get significantly stranger as her claims continue. First off, it appears the claim against Apple for unauthorized use is bogus. Apple’s response to the lawsuit points out it licensed the recordings of Gura-Eini’s voice from Nuance Communications. Nuance had the rights to Gura-Eini’s voice, so Apple was under no legal obligation to remove the recordings just because she didn’t want the company to use them.
Things go completely off the rail with Gura-Eini’s other claims. She says she only granted a license to Nuance for “legitimate” uses. So she’s suing Apple over the actions of users, claiming the end use of pre-recorded syllables by certain iPhone owners isn’t legit.
The lawsuit suggests that Gura-Eini’s voice is “widely identified and associated” with her own live persona. Furthermore, users have taken to using the voice to make it say inappropriate things. This amounts to turning the plaintiff’s voice, “into a vehicle for improper and humiliating speech.”
The licensee — Apple — cannot control how end users manipulate a series of recorded syllables controlled by an algorithm. Its use of Gura-Eini’s voice for its Hebrew version of Siri is a completely legitimate use. No matter how disturbing it might be to hear your own voice saying horrible things you’d never say, the problem is end users, not Apple.
It’s impossible to see how this case moves forward. If the licensing is all in place — and it appears to be (Apple is longtime partner of Nuance Communications) — the only thing left is someone seeking to soothe their ruffled feathers with $66,000 from Apple’s checkbook.
Filed Under: galit gura-eini, hebrew, israel, siri, siri's voice, text-to-speech
Companies: apple, nuance
Comments on “Siri's Hebrew Voice Sues Apple Because She Doesn't Like The Way IPhone Owners Are Using Siri”
Licenses
If anyone it would be Nuance that possibly violated the terms of the contract they had with her. If she says this is an inappropriate use then it is because Nuance licensed it to Apple as syllables and phonemes rather than complete sentences.
Unless she specifically sold Nuance the phonemes – in which case there would be no way to determine what a "Legit" use would be, would there?
Re: Licenses
She almost certainly did sell Nuance the phonemes. As the official voice of Waze (among other things) it would be nearly impossible to have her recorded directly saying all possible streets and addresses in the markets that Waze serves. Though even that wouldn’t be full sentences, just short phrases. Full sentences would require her to say all possible variations of (in “distance” turn “direction”/continue on “street name” using “lane(s)”), which would be even less possible to accomplish.
Re: Re: Licenses
Nah, you’re just guessing. My guess is that sold something like "tone", perhaps hard to define items like cadence, derived from samples. Modern techniques that you are evidently not up on (likely not on "deepfakes" either) can synthesize an almost perfect output.
Re: Re: Re: Licenses
PS: it’d be nice if Techdirt minion had answered that, but evidently was in the source that he just re-wrote.
Re: Re: Re:
So are you.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Yes, he is. He even states it: “My guess is….” But you stated your guess as the authoritative answer, which it isn’t. That takes you into Trump territory.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Doh… Not necessarily you, but whoever the AC was who posted the GGP comment.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Nuance as a company is rather involved with voice-to-speech and speech-to voice technology. It would be a good guess that they would have voice actors record a range of samples and phonemes for use in their products.
I mentioned both to cover all the bases – and either way, she doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
Re: Re: Re: Licenses
“You’re just guessing so I’ll reject your words, but here’s my guess with zero supporting evidence and I’m right!”
I guess you think this is a valid argument?
Siri, say “Galit Gura-Eini is a twat”.
Forced association / hosting / literally speaking for.
Now, if was Facebook "platform", Techdirt would vehemently argue rights of association / term of service (= licensing) / First Amendment Right to control one’s speech (literally here!), but no, in Techdirt’s view, "natural" persons must always lose to globalist mega-corporations.
[PS: See, I’m sticking up rights of an Israeli! So you can NEVER again accuse me of "anti-Semitism", by Techdirt’s standard of once is enough for all time.]
Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking for.
You literally have no idea what you’re talking about, likely because you don’t even bother to read anything.
She was not “forced.”
This has nothing to do with the First Amendment.
This has nothing to do with terms of service.
Also, you protest too much. But that isn’t a surprise.
Re: Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking for.
You literally have no grasp of (not entirely unjustified) analogy plus a bit of sarcasm.
Re: Re: Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking fo
Your analogy is wrong, as always. Move along.
Re: Re: Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking fo
“You literally have no grasp of (not entirely unjustified) analogy”
You have no grasp of the English language. Your analogy appears to be that if it were a completely different situation then the reaction would be different. Well, yes, it would…?
Re:
And if we were talking about factual information related to copyright infringement, you would argue that mega-corporations must always have the right to “control” the “speech” of “ ‘natural’ persons”.
So which is it: Do mega-corps have a “right to censor” or not?
Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking for.
Alright, I’m going to take a shot at answering this. I know that you are either going to run away or just respond with something irrelevant but I can try…
Now, if was Facebook "platform", Techdirt would vehemently argue rights of association / term of service (= licensing) / First Amendment Right to control one’s speech (literally here!), but no, in Techdirt’s view, "natural" persons must always lose to globalist mega-corporations.
I’m going to try to see what you are saying – she did work for hire. She signed a reasonable contract. (Not some weird adhesion clause like "using this website means we get all your data.) She likely even has an agent that negotiated her contract. (And – she is likely herself incorporated but I’m not going to check on that.)
So by all the copyright laws you hold dear, she has legally licensed Nuance to use her voice? What is your actual complaint here, or are you just bored?
[PS: See, I’m sticking up rights of an Israeli! So you can NEVER again accuse me of "anti-Semitism", by Techdirt’s standard of once is enough for all time.]
Your numerous attacks on the Jewish conspiracy are more telling than standing up for one person against a corporation. I’ll take this to be the "sarcasm" you mentioned.
Re: Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking for.
You clearly have no idea what techdirt view is… Please do not speak as if you do.
Re: Forced association / hosting / literally speaking for.
Interesting point… is Masnick all about Israeli interests as is usually posted in these threads, or is he all about Google/Apple and against Israeli people?
It’s all in the Nuance I guess.
Re: Re:
Or is he working for the Chinese?
OMG HE’S A CHINESE-PALESTINIAN SPY WORKING FOR GOOGLE
Mike, why didn’t you tell us?
The lawsuit suggests that Gura-Eini’s voice is “widely identified and associated” with her own live persona.
If your voice is a vital part of your public identity and primary career, maybe you shouldn’t be doing voice acting gigs on the side. (Or does being a voice "artist" sidestep this criticism?)
Hello Smithers. You’re quite good at turning me on.
Pay Up
She doesn’t have a leg to stand on… but for $66K, it’s sadly probably much easier to just pay the money.
Re: Pay Up
The problem is if you pay off one cockroach, all the rest come crawling out of the woodwork. Like New Egg and patents, it’s better in the long term to fight every claim.
Re: Re: Pay Up
Pretty much. She’s literally suing them for doing what they said they’d do, only that now she’s either realised it was a mistake or was too dumb to know what she agreed to when she got paid for the work. They’d be crazy to settle over “oops I changed my mind, give me money”.
Well then cut Hebrew Siri, recast, replace, reintroduce. If an artist is going to launch a lawsuit over how end-user enjoy their work then it’s time to find a new artist.
Thanks for the laugh.
It was the first real chuckle I’ve had today. Too bad it wasn’t an actual joke, but it remains a joke anyway.
This is certainly one way to out yourself as a Siri voice, don’t you think?
Siridiot
So basically, she is pissed off that the company she sold or licensed the rights to her voice to used her voice for the reason they bought it – to make money.
Great…
Cue the antisemitism in the comments.
Re: Re:
Where? We’re arguing against her erroneous assumption that she can exercise control over the way her recorded voice is used. She can’t, it’s impossible to control end-user behaviour, so she’s being unreasonable.