• SeattleRain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    That’s not proof of anything. It’s the most well known reference to a “AI Girlfriend” in popular culture that there currently is.

    This reminds me of when the Fine Brothers tried to trademark the word “react” or when Paris Hilton did the same thing for “That’s hot”.

    • zik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Celebrities get wide latitude to protect themselves from imitators. Impressionists can do “satire” etc. but this isn’t that. It’s explicitly a reference to her voice in the movie, and as such she’s protected by law from them going around her and hiring someone else to imitate her.

      • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well maybe Scarlet needs to start pay royalties to millions of Midwestern women. Because she didn’t come up with that way of talking on her own now did she?

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          This argument is so stupid it’s even remarkably stupider than the surrounding comments in a lemmy thread full of braindead bot humpers.

          Congrats! 🎈

    • Jarix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Alternate theory, they heard what they came up with, tried to liscence the use of her voice to avoid a legal fight, hoped she might come around after the fact and now here we are.

      Seems possible anyway.

      Do we know Sam had any specific and previous interest in Scarlet?