Transcript
Goldman Sachs Markets Podcast Host (0:03)
What's driving the markets this week? What's on investors minds as they look ahead? Find out in 10 minutes or less on the markets podcast from Goldman Sachs. Listen now.
Peter Ciampelli (0:18)
Welcome to Tech News briefing. It's Tuesday, January 20th. I'm Peter Champelli for the Wall Street Journal. Celebrities like Tom Hanks and Taylor Swift have been the subject of AI deepfakes. As generative tools have got more and more popular. Matthew McConaughey is trying a new strategy, trademarking himself. Then Netflix has cemented itself as an entertainment heavyweight with its recent bid for Warner Bros. Discovery and its $5 billion deal with World Wrestling Entertainment. But does the company have what it takes to dominate the next frontier in Internet stream? But first, Matthew McConaughey, the star of movies like Interstellar, Magic Mike and the classic Dazed and Confused, has had eight trademark applications approved which he plans to use to fight AI misuse. To break this down, we spoke with Wall Street Journal reporter Ben Fritz. Ben, what exactly are these trademarks that Matthew McConaughey registered?
Ben Fritz (1:18)
Well, they're very vague general trademarks. One is of him basically looking at the camera in front of a Christmas tree. Another one is him standing out on a porch. And then a few are of him talking, including one where he says his famous line from Dazed and Confused.
Peter Ciampelli (1:33)
All right, all right, all right.
Ben Fritz (1:36)
They're meant to be really big in general so that his attorneys can they hope use them to fight any and all unauthorized AI fakes of him.
Interviewer (1:46)
And so what do these trademarks protect? How would he use these against what kind of videos or products?
Ben Fritz (1:53)
Well, the intention is he could potentially use them against anything that is unauthorized. And he is upset about there are already are laws in states called right of publicity which he could use if somebody tried to use an AI fake of him to sell a product. But the law gets a lot murkier with videos that are sort of creative but sort of commercial, which describes so much on the Internet. Basically anything you put on YouTube that has ads, for example, you know, it's both commercial and creative. So the right of publicity may not apply. And it's also that's not federal and they would like to be able to take people to federal court and therefore have any ruling apply nationwide. So that's why they're trying this trademark approach. But they fully admit that this is, it's untested to have such a broad trademark on a human being. And if somebody decides to fight them about it and it goes to a federal court, they're not sure how a judge is going to rule but they want to try.
