The AI Vocal "Processor" I REALLY Want...

[Tidwells@aol.com]

Ditto that, Mike! I'm also considering a similar scenario: My wife has dementia and can no longer sing well. I would like to try using this plug-in to have her "voice" sing some of the new songs I've written.

[mikehalloran]

It looks like this might be the plug-in I've been wishing for: https://www.soundonsound.com/news/real- ... s-vocoflex

Sounds like it has the ability to morph between vocal models....

Doug

I may be looking for that, too. There’s a singer I’m working with suffering from mild dementia with the album unfinished. He dropped off the grid for a month recently and we thought that we’d lost him. I have 36 years of samples o that isn’t an issue and there’s another singer in the band who can do a spot-on imitation of his vocal style. It will be very interesting if I can make it work.

I purchased, received a license and then received an email directing me to a site that asked for a copy of an official government issued ID before I am able to download the product that I paid for. Since they also have payment information, that violates many US and California consumer protection laws. Since they are not an agency of the US Government, State of California, an airline or one of my medical care providers, this is absolutely unacceptable. I have filled out the form at https://www.complycube.com/. The next step is to file complaints with the California Department of Consumer Affairs and my credit card company. They are not allowed to do that here.

[Tidwells@aol.com]

Thanks for the "heads-up", Mike! Keep us updated on what happens with this company.

[James Steele]

Mmm... I just went to their site to check it out and came across this:

Safety and Fairness are Above All
While Vocoflex is designed for creative applications, Dreamtonics understands the potential risks and ethical implications of its use beyond these intended purposes.

As a precautionary measure, Vocoflex requires ID verification through our KYC-service partner.

To further prevent unauthorized usage, Vocoflex embeds an inaudible audio watermark into the voice, enabling Dreamtonics to identify the creator of altered voices and curb the usage of voice samples without the singer's consent - a practice prohibited by our license terms.

Our advanced watermarking technology is resilient against audio manipulations such as mixing with background music and transmission through a phone call.

I guess the laudable goal here is to prevent people from using this technology to commit fraud? If you can make it sound like a specific individual singing... might be possible to make it sound like a particular individual talking and saying "Hey Dave... this is Joe... I'm in trouble... when you get this message I need you to send $500 to me right away at my paypal.com" or whatever scam people might pull these days.

But yeah... as laudable as it is... I don't see how it's legal to have a policy like that unless it became government mandated?

[mikehalloran]

in California, these laws were passed in 1985 to prevent identity theft. Those of us old enough remember when clerks would write our driver's license # and a credit card on the face of a check. That stopped when those laws took effect. You could look at the driver's license but were not allowed to write the number down and requiring a credit card became prohibited.

I read the part of their EULA where it gives them the right to retain payment information and that's when I applied the brakes.

We've been trading email. I'll condense it eventually. For now, I've asked for a refund and suggested that my correspondence be forwarded to an attorney.

This is a hot cauldron for identity theft and there are no assurances from anyone in the company that can convince me otherwise.

[stubbsonic]

When I first saw the headline for this plugin and saw the demo, my immediate thought was about how this was going to be used to:

A. Steal a famous vocalist's sound
B. Substitute a person's voice in order to commit some deep fakery, fraud, and slander
C. Commit some other mischief, crime, trouble.
D. Solve problems in the studio

In that order.

The measures they are taking make sense. They are trying to get in front of the very trouble the software will cause by trying to link the audio itself to the specific user-- and thus be able to notify authorities if some audio is used for criminal purposes. Is KYC (Know Your Customer) a singular service or a generic name for various ways to link an "account" to a specific sack of meat with a home address?

I honestly don't blame them for wanting to try to create such a link in this particular case, but there should be a way to make it secure, private, encrypted (?), so that it can only be accessed via warrant. I'm way out of my depth, when I express this opinion-- but I'm just saying this tech is merely sticking a dinner fork into an already open can of worms-- and it's a hot squirmy mess.

[mikehalloran]

The problem is that they want to keep copies of our ID and payment information. That is what is not allowed. Likewise, keeping my credit card is unnecessary for the Big Brother act they are trying to pull.

I had this same argument in 2003 with the manager of a Blockbuster store in San Francisco who cited "store policy" as his reason for violating these laws. Fortunately, he was routed to someone up the food chain who told him, correctly, that he could look at my driver's license but not take a picture or write the number down since he had my credit card on file.

I have asked Support to stop arguing with me and send this to their legal department. In addition, I have asked for a refund but I would really like to see the EULA changed to eliminate their "right" to retain my payment information. Many companies flush payment info after the sale; no new ground being broken here.

[stubbsonic]

Ah. I missed that. Thanks for the clarification.

They've got ID theft at both ends of the stick there, it appears.

[bayswater]

Are they just covering their asses, or does keeping a copy of a purchaser’s ID somehow prevent the use of the software for an illegal purpose?

As for them sending this to their lawyers, I don’t see how that helps. Presumably it was the lawyers that told them to do this.

[mikehalloran]

Are they just covering their asses, or does keeping a copy of a purchaser’s ID somehow prevent the use of the software for an illegal purpose?

They have a way of watermarking the resulting audio. They cannot prevent illegal or unauthorized use (not necessarily the same thing) but they will know who created the file and can report it—not necessarily law enforcement, either. I don't have a problem with this, BTW — it's the potential of my identity being compromised that is the problem.

As for them sending this to their lawyers, I don’t see how that helps. Presumably it was the lawyers that told them to do this.

The company is in Japan. They don't get to violate certain US and California laws—whether this violates Canada privacy laws is not something I know.

I am not the only person who has noticed what is going on.

[bayswater]

They have a way of watermarking the resulting audio. They cannot prevent illegal or unauthorized use (not necessarily the same thing) but they will know who created the file

They’ll know who bought the licence, but they won’’t know who made the file.

The company is in Japan. They don't get to violate certain US and California laws—whether this violates Canada privacy laws is not something I know.

In Canada the main privacy provision is that you cannot use information for a purpose other than the reason someone gave it to you. So I guess they could keep the ID info, but they couldn’t do anything with it.

If they are selling this from Japan for export, my expectation is that they can do whatever they like if it clears laws in Japan, but under those conditions they shouldn’t be collecting any money before the conditions of the sale are met.
In any case it’s a company to avoid.

[mikehalloran]

They’ll know who bought the licence, but they won’’t know who made the file.

That's the part you are not understanding. The goal is for them to know absolutely.

You have to upload a government issued ID with your picture and address such as a passport or driver's license—some countries use residency permits with pictures. As you upload this, you have to upload a picture taken in real time with the camera in your computer.

Every time you use the app, reverification of some form will take place so that the audio can be digitally watermarked (how is a secret) so that, if the file is being used inappropriately, its creator can be identified.

[/quote]

In Canada the main privacy provision is that you cannot use information for a purpose other than the reason someone gave it to you. So I guess they could keep the ID info, but they couldn’t do anything with it.

Unless there's a data breach or someone inside gets greedy and starts selling passport info along with matching credit cards. Of course, that's supposed to be impossible. I read the news and I've recently received letters from Wells Fargo, AT&T, Ticketmaster/Live Nation and CitiBank that my data has been compromised within the last two years—none of them have copies of my ID on file, however. All of my credit cards have been replaced in the last three months.

If they are selling this from Japan for export, my expectation is that they can do whatever they like if it clears laws in Japan,

Tell that one to Apple. They'd certainly like to sell that concept to the EU, Japan and India

but under those conditions they shouldn’t be collecting any money before the conditions of the sale are met.
In any case it’s a company to avoid.

Yep. Unfortunately, they took the money, sent me a license and then emailed this crap to me before I will get a download. They have 30 days to issue me a refund but AMEX will back me up on the 31st day if no action is taken—international treaties are involved.

[bayswater]

That's the part you are not understanding. The goal is for them to know absolutely.

You have to upload a government issued ID with your picture and address such as a passport or driver's license—some countries use residency permits with pictures. As you upload this, you have to upload a picture taken in real time with the camera in your computer.

Every time you use the app, reverification of some form will take place so that the audio can be digitally watermarked (how is a secret) so that, if the file is being used inappropriately, its creator can be identified.

Are you assuming the person identified is the creator? Seems unlikely they could pull that off. How could you prove it’s the same person? And if the watermark is digital, you could just D/A/D it?

[stubbsonic]

And if the watermark is digital, you could just D/A/D it?

I was wondering about that. If it's encoded in the audio, it might be cleverly masked noise that just has to hide out throughout the audio.

[mikehalloran]

Are you assuming the person identified is the creator?

I am assuming nothing. They are assuming this and taking great pains to make certain that only those individuals with verified licenses and identities are allowed to use it. Will they be successful? I don't know.

Seems unlikely they could pull that off. How could you prove it’s the same person? And if the watermark is digital, you could just D/A/D it?

No doubt many hacks will be posted soon enough and perhaps some might even work. This is not my issue at the moment—the potential for theft of my identity is.

I want this for a project I'm working on where the lead singer is suffering from bouts of dementia. Unfortunately, he is the only one who doesn't know that his inability to cut it anymore is wasting a lot of time and costing a lot of money.