Photo Credits: (
Meena Alnajar is anĚýIPilogueĚý°Â°ůľ±łŮ±đ°ů, IP Innovation Clinic Fellow,Ěýand a 2L JD Candidate atĚýOsgoodeĚýHall Law School.Ěý
Ěý
If you have used TikTok in the last seven months, you have likely come across the computerized voice narrating TikTok videos across the globe. The person behind this voice is Canadian voice actor from Welland, Ontario. Despite TikTok’s (USD) value, Standing had not been paid or asked for her voice to be used for Tiktok’s new text-to-speech function, released in . Standing is now pursuing a , drawing attention to how individuals could approach social media conglomerates and take control over their content. On narrating videos, which could alter the direction of Standing’s current claims.
Copyright claim
Standing first became aware of her voice in TikTok videos in late 2020. Her friend , noticing her voice in the background. In early May, Standing filed a copyright violation claim against ByteDance for using her voice recordings without obtaining permission. involves performing a copyrighted work publicly through digital audio transmission. In the United States, the maximum penalty is $150,000 per infringement which, in this case, could mean $150,000 for each TikTok video utilizing the text-to-speech feature. TikTok has yet to to Standing’s team in order to determine how many infringements were committed. Standing’s lawyer, , included in the claim that she not only missed out on a six-figure job, but that TikTok is causing her irreparable harm and injury as these videos can threaten Standing’s reputation and brand as a voice actor.
Standing’s team can thus support her claim using moral rights. enable the author of the work to protect their reputation. of a work can violate the author’s moral rights if it prejudices their reputation. Standing may have a moral right to be recognized for her voice as it connects to her work’s integrity. The text-to-speech function currently has no limitations in terms of use or content. In the United States, moral rights are interpreted narrowly. Many works, such as applied arts, . Standing’s team can also rely on likeness for this copyright claim. In most states, parties can be sued for utilizing , such as one’s personal attributes, for an exploitative purpose. If it is proven that TikTok’s text-to-speech feature utilizes Standing’s voice, Standing can claim the .
The initial question of how TikTok gained access to Standing’s voice recordings remains unanswered. In 2018, Standing was , a research organization in China, to record thousands of English sentences for translations. Standing’s team posits that those recordings came into TikTok’s possession for the text-to-speech function. The Institute of Acoustics may have granted TikTok access to the voice recordings. Standing’s case can also set a precedent for contractual requirements for voice actors and in their work contracts in order to avoid future misuse of their voice.
If Standing’s claim is unsuccessful, there may be detrimental effects for other creators whose content is utilized by large corporations without their consent. Professor Pina D’Agostino, copyright law expert and Director of IP Osgoode, stated in that if this claim is unsuccessful, “you almost eradicate the industry” as “you could say everything is free for the taking.” Without clearer guidelines, social media platforms may continue to misuse voice actors’ works without so little as an attribution.
TikTok’s reaction
TikTok has not filed a formal response to Standing’s legal claim, but TikTok users recently noticed a new female voice narrating videos, Standing has been made aware of this voice replacement. The change was not publicly announced nor . While not indicative of the case’s outcome, legal experts agreed that this change was a way for TikTok . Professor D’Agostino comments that it is a In a sense, she says
Looking towards the future
To date, and they have to file a response to Standing’s claim. Though a representative has stated that , Professor D’Agostino states that the voice change may be , if only , as that could mean paying for any TikTok video which utilizes the text-to-speech function. With , each having the option to use the text-to-speech feature, it could be in TikTok’s financial interest to settle the claim early. It would also require Standing’s team to or that had replaced her voice. On the other hand, business law expert as this case does not currently threaten the app’s revenues. Replacing Standing’s voice unless it is proven to be Standing’s voice in previous videos.
Standing’s case can help create some guidelines for social media platforms that generate their wealth and usership through accessible audio content. TikTok rose to fame for its for videos. The text-to-speech feature has contributed to the app’s popularity. However, the limitless nature of the text-to-speech function could have cost Standing opportunities and possibly her reputation. The function had been . Standing’s lawyer notes that the is part of Standing’s legal claim. TikTok’s audio library is key to the app experience, but this library can be misused at the expense of creators and actors that keep the app thriving. It may be time for courts to provide some guidelines for how people can have their work and integrity protected on large social media platforms.