Comments by "Peter" (@peter65zzfdfh) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1.  @jonahfalcon1970 the actress was given an agreement that included royalties while it was being used. Royalties she’s missing out on due to the reaction of a wealthy actress.
    52
  2.  @jonahfalcon1970 the contract apparently includes royalties while the voice continues to be used. I imagine there’s a bunch of deranged fans that would be a threat to her safety if her identity was public, and potentially people that had issue with her not being in a union or working outside their rules if she was. No doubt the amount of compensation isn’t that great she can afford to hire security and deal with the media circus. And clearly she sounds nothing alike.
    51
  3. I believe this was in the middle of the strike so it was that or just non American voices. But yes obviously when they’re paying royalties on potentially trillions of impressions they wanted a low base rate, I imagine a union member would be entitled to more than the GDP of the world for that role.
    37
  4.  @autumnberend828 multiple fatalities have occurred with blanks. While the chance and fatal range is dramatically reduced they can still do serious damage at very close ranges or if mis manufactured. Unless the shot absolutely requires it you do not point any gun at anyone, and certainly not a person behind a camera that could be remotely operated for risky shots. In any industry safety is all about having multiple different things that need to go wrong to have an injury, you don’t unnecessarily remove a safety precaution because the other precautions should be enough.
    23
  5. The union was on strike at the time, so it seems more like shorthand for ‘willing and able to work’. Eg, they could be in the union but willing to break union rules.
    20
  6. Based on how different the voice is, probably so they could add a sixth voice to the FIVE they had already. It’s not uncommon for such apps to have dozens of voices. Has been a thing since the days of early GPS systems, getting a bunch of unknowns to do the default voices then adding famous people later.
    14
  7.  @Jay_the_AV8R they did, the Republicans in congress denied the previous administration the power and finances to do so sufficiently, just to convince people like you they weren’t though. It worked. Unfortunately the last administration followed the law…
    12
  8. Not only that, but the US is a great example of what happens when it's voluntary. You get extreme right and left candidates who only have to appeal to their extreme, because those in the middle are where you find people that care about voting the least, they just don't show up, so they rarely get 'moderate' candidates who actually do what most of the country does. You have the ~40% that show up getting to pick a candidate than just more than half of them (~21% of the country) support. That means it really sucks big time for 80% of the country, instead of it sucking a little bit for 40%. Extreme candidates don't survive long when you have 90% of people voting. It's a lot more free to be safe from being totally f-ed over by 'the other side' than it is to be free to 'f over' people you don't like half the time and get the same in return the other half. Rights should come with responsibilities, it's generally not a hard concept for people to understand in most other things. Coincidentally when people 'have to' show up to vote (they don't actually have to cast a vote). They also are shown to take more interest in politics and thus have historically been better informed.
    11
  9. The advertisement went up a year ago when the union was on strike so they didn’t have any union options. They only reached out for a sixth voice after they had these five already. Probably to get the publicity from the overreaction to a voice that sounds nothing alike.
    11
  10. ⁠ @clayortex this is incorrect, they were required to find he committed the crime for the defamation finding to exist. If they couldn’t find he digitally penetrated her they would have had to find him innocent of defamation. They didn’t convict him, but no one outside the comments here is arguing that straw man, he was found guilty of what most jurisdictions now call rape, even if at the time they only called it sexual assault.
    11
  11.  @jonahfalcon1970 the US isn’t the only jurisdiction. Unions aren’t a mandatory thing in other countries. You get paid, you’re a professional. There’s no such thing as a union requirement, that’s a fairytale you’re told. Unions are great but you’re so very wrong.
    10
  12. Clarence Thomas has overturned previous decisions he made in favor of the people he goes on holiday with, and who own his mother’s house where she lives rent free. You’re delusional if you think money and discussions with the people giving it to you don’t make you more aligned with what they want. They might have already been inclined that way, but they’d never destroy their reputation wholesale for free.
    10
  13. It doesn’t sound anything like her. Seriously has anyone listened to them side by side?
    8
  14. Sounds more like 1/5th the country than ScarJo.
    8
  15.  @shaswatsingh2629 this is incorrect, the narrow definition that applied at the time isn’t the definition today. Digital rape is rape under today’s legal definition in most every western jurisdiction.
    7
  16. ⁠ @GingrBreadMan while I broadly agree with you, I think it’s short sighted to discount the possibility he just changed his mind, and that he had no intention to do so until Kash Patel was floated for nomination. At least the gun charge is rarely to never prosecuted.
    6
  17.  @Draelyn Why do you love Trump so much that you’d rather see America fail than admit he’s destroying it for his own personal gain?
    6
  18. She sounds nothing alike. Have you listened to the two voices? Like half the people I know sound closer and none of them are even American.
    6
  19. If you’re pretty unknown and you’re doxed in a situation like this your safety is at risk.
    5
  20.  @hus390 no Trump wants his judge to consider his political calendar, reasonable people want just fair treatment anyone else would get, not the special political protection your king god has received.
    5
  21.  @allisond.46  In Australia the fine usually imposed if you don't have a good reason, is only $20 AUD (about $15 USD) - the video says $100 but last election it was definitely $20, and yet it causes 90% turnout. People see it as a responsibility, stay more engaged, politicians have to appeal to the center instead of just those motivated by extremist views who will turn out and vote for 'their side' no matter what they do. That and it's all day on a Saturday, and with rare exceptions only taking 1-15 minutes to actually go vote (a couple of weeks ago there was more staff than voters there when I voted), with early or postal votes widely available for those who cannot attend on the day due to work/holiday/disability/religion.
    5
  22.  @mnomadvfx only because enforcing the laws protecting the US has somehow become partisan.
    4
  23. Except it sounds less like her than half the country does.
    4
  24. The contract apparently includes royalties. The advertisement went up May last year though, when the union was on strike. So non union is code for ‘able and willing to work immediately’.
    4
  25.  @MrMcWitt the settlement didn’t give him any money, it paid his legal fees and gave money to some future library. These things could cost way way more to defend and win than they paid to settle.
    3
  26. They hired five and approached Scarlett to be the sixth which she declined so they used the five different voices they had. Seems in this case they didn’t steal anything but publicity from the controversy.
    3
  27. They just wanted her to overreact for the free publicity, it sounds nothing like her. Even lab analysis of the voice shows 2% of voices are more similar than hers, including Anne Hathaway and Keri Russell. Washington Post has also confirmed it’s the voice actresses normal speaking voice.
    3
  28.  @silverfeathered1 the insurance typically pays rent elsewhere while waiting to rebuild. Yes it can be multiple years. It doesn’t matter what the land value is, it’s what rent is and the rebuild cost. Approval isn’t really a huge factor, neither is demolition. Lack of skilled trades in the area (and accommodation for them) is.
    3
  29.  @blakekaveny she’s not incompetent she’s just appearing that way because she’s corruptly protecting someone for political reasons.
    2
  30. Parody is protected, also even though he doesn’t *have to*, he actually gets permission for all his songs. One or two he has made and not released because he didn’t get permission.
    2
  31.  @Quantum_Nebula Biden did 160 his entire presidency. That was much less than Trump’s first term…
    2
  32.  @JoseDiaz-pl5kk lol. Higher than it’s ever been. It’s not. It’s low even for Trump compared to the start of his 2016 term.
    2
  33. They hired many people, they published five voices already, if she said yes they could have added hers as number six. They recorded the other voices a year ago while the union was on strike. Given how little alike the voices sound it seems like it was to bait her into reacting to give them free publicity.
    2
  34. Lots of reasons. The actress is unlikely to be wealthy enough to have security to protect her from deranged fans, it’s possible that being non union would affect her career, she might not even be American. You don’t generally dox people that work for you either. If it needs to come out in court it will. Doesn’t sound similar anyway.
    2
  35. Billions on a president. It’s a cheap way of owning the US. And yet all that president has to do is not mention the members of their campaign jailed for being Russian agents, and tell their followers it was a hoax and their followers are too willing to follow to bother checking the facts.
    1
  36. Except the voice sounds nothing like her and was captured before asking if she could be a sixth voice to the five they had already. Not a fan of Altman but I guarantee if he didn’t act all suspicious no one would have associated the voices.
    1
  37.  @Bradiant Biden signed below average, and more than 1/3 less than Trump’s first term, and most were just undoing the criminal ones Trump signed. The others were attempting to do something about the border with Republicans blocking action so exactly this would happen.
    1
  38. Free publicity. Altman clearly engineered the reaction for the publicity but it’s very clearly nothing like her voice. Lab studies showed several other actresses had more similar voices.
    1
  39. Mostly they can use the image how they like, but they can’t use it to imply you endorse their product etc.
    1
  40.  @valolafson6035 the biggest proof is it doesn’t sound at all like her, even a lab study of the voice showed it sounded more like Anne Hathaway or Keri Russell. Because it’s just a ‘warm’ female voice.
    1
  41. If they tried to emulate the voice they could have gotten a lot closer. At best they tried to emulate ‘warmth’ etc.
    1
  42. I think the distinction typically has been where you’re implying someone endorses your product vs an obvious parody for humorous effect. Regardless of if you’re being paid. There’s loads of examples of protected parody (eg South Park) various magazines etc,
    1
  43. Sounds nothing like her though, if they hadn’t contacted her about being a sixth voice no one would have ever thought she was one of the other five. Also relevant is they hired the actress to do the voice May last year, while only asking Scarlett about adding her voice recently.
    1
  44. They clearly wanted her to overreact to a voice that sounds provably nothing like her. They released 5 voices, they obviously didn’t try very hard to contact her, they recorded the voices a year ago.
    1
  45.  @ThePownageMaster lol, the irony in that lying and crying sentence.
    1
  46.  @mothboy420 not in the way they defined it at the time it occurred at least. Just how everyone defines it now.
    1
  47. The ad was in May 2023, the union was on strike and would be for many more months. Shorthand for ‘able to work immediately’.
    1
  48. This video is weeks after it was a story, give it time.
    1
  49. They ad and work was over a year ago while the union was on strike. So it’s a coded way of saying ‘available to work now’. They literally could not have hired someone union unless they were not in the US.
    1
  50. The agent of the actress used has said she was not instructed to sound like anyone else. The Washington Post has confirmed it’s her normal speaking voice. Which seems fair, they sound nothing alike. Even studies by speech researchers have found the voice sounds more similar to other actresses. Yes, taking it down and contacting Scarlett at all both seem like actions designed to boost the amount of attention the story got. Free publicity. It’s like they were counting on her overreacting to a voice that was nothing like her and doing free advertising them.
    1
  51.  @lilykep any situation that relies on a single person to not mess up is unnecessarily dangerous. People mess up. This isn’t the first time and won’t be the last. The more people are required to mess up concurrently for a fatality to occur the less fatalities there will be.
    1
  52. As Devin suggested, to get her to give them free publicity by slamming a voice that sounds nothing like her.
    1
  53. Except they hired the other voice actress a year earlier and she sounds nothing alike. WaPo have confirmed it’s her natural speaking voice. They only asked Scarlett to be the sixth voice a short time ago, probably so they could get the publicity when she over reacted to a voice that sounds nothing like her.
    1
  54. At the time they cast the voice actress the union was on strike. They didn’t have a choice.
    1
  55. The union was on strike at the time so they’re obviously looking for someone to work immediately both the many months later the strike ended. As a non media company they’re not really beholden to US actors unions.
    1
  56. Voices cannot be copyrighted. Also voice analysis has found its less similar to her voice than several other well known actresses. It’s just a female American voice.
    1
  57. Same. He’s a jerk but they sound nothing alike.
    1