A company called OpenAI was going to make a voice assistant that sounds like a famous actress named Scarlett Johansson. But she didn't want her voice to be used without asking her first. So, the company decided not to use her voice and wait before launching their product. This made some people who work with technology very interested in what OpenAI is doing. Read from source...

1. The article is titled "OpenAI Postpones Launch Of Voice Assistant A Month After Scarlet Johansson Blasted The ChatGPT Parent For Allegedly Replicating Her Voice Without Permission". This title implies a causal relationship between the two events, suggesting that Johansson's criticism is the reason for OpenAI's postponement. However, this assumption is not supported by any evidence in the article. It could be possible that OpenAI had other reasons to delay the launch, such as technical issues, legal challenges, or market feedback. Therefore, the title is misleading and sensationalist.
2. The article mentions that Johansson demanded that one of the ChatGPT voices be removed for sounding too similar to hers, but it does not provide any details on how the voice was generated, what criteria were used to measure similarity, or how OpenAI responded to her request. This information is relevant for understanding the nature and scope of the issue, as well as the legal and ethical implications. The article seems to rely on Johansson's subjective perception of her own voice, without considering other perspectives or factors that could influence the outcome.
3. The article quotes Johansson saying that she was "forced to hire" legal counsel to address the use of her voice by OpenAI's chatbot. This statement implies that OpenAI acted unlawfully or unfairly, but it does not explain what kind of legal action she took, what grounds she had for her claim, or how OpenAI defended itself. The article does not provide any context or background on the possible copyright or trademark infringement issues involved, nor does it explore the broader implications for AI-generated voices and their relation to human performers. The article seems to favor Johansson's side of the story, without questioning her motives or challenging her arguments.
4. The article reports that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman approached Johansson in September to lend her voice to ChatGPT, but she declined for personal reasons. This information is irrelevant and unnecessary for the main topic of the article, which is the postponement of the launch. It also suggests a conflict of interest or an improper use of influence by Altman, as he apparently tried to persuade Johansson to change her mind after she had already expressed her displeasure publicly. The article does not examine the ethical implications of this situation, nor does it consider how it could affect OpenAI's reputation and credibility.
5. The article mentions that the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) backed Johansson. This fact is presented as a supporting evidence for her

Bearish
Explanation: The article discusses the postponement of OpenAI's voice assistant launch after Scarlett Johansson blasted them for allegedly replicating her voice without permission. This creates a negative sentiment as it shows that there is controversy and legal issues surrounding the company and its product, which could potentially harm its reputation and success.