Exactly. EA do it because enough people allow them to do it.

I’ve also heard YouTube creators talk about how they think a certain style of thumbnail is stupid, but they do it because it generates clicks.

Clickbait is probably not something that people want, but their prevalence seem to indicate that they work, unfortunately.

Not sure if I associate these actions with innocent 🤷‍♂️

When asked about Trump, 41 percent had favorable views in contrast to 54 percent who said they did not and 5 percent were undecided, giving the president a -13 net favorability.

The results gave Kimmel a 16-point lead in favorability, according to the YouGov poll.

Its both actual search and AI-features (which I’m unable to tell you more about right now as I merely skimmed through the description of the AI-features to verify that the search index will also serve plain, old, actual search).

Does this only affect digital reproductions?

The article seems focused on the digital angle, but I’m not sure.

Because it’s sometimes easy to reproduce someone’s else voice especially if you are a voice actor.

Is that widespread? My impression is that misrepresentation through fake likeness has exploded from AI generated deepfakes?

And what if you happen to have a voice almost identical to another person?

Then you have the right to your voice and they have the right to their voice. If neither uses the likeness for misrepresentation or other nefarious means then nothing will come of it. If either do there are probably already possibilities within current legal frameworks to prosecute.

It is hygge to read about Denmark doing good work in this area.

The proposal establishes legal definitions for unauthorized digital reproductions, specifically targeting “very realistic digital representation of a person, including their appearance and voice.”

Creative works such as parody and satirical content remain exempt from these restrictions.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91360589/denmark-copyright-yourself-it-might-be-the-only-way-to-stop-deepfakes