Vocal Attributes of Voice Actors: Not Protectable as Trademarks When Functioning as Products and Not Source Identifiers

In Lehrman v. Lovo, the court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the voice-over actor plaintiffs’ false association claim. Plaintiffs Paul Lehrman and Linnea Sage, both professional voice actors, brought a putative class action against Lovo Inc., an artificial intelligence (AI) voice-over software company, alleging that Lovo unlawfully used their voices to create and sell AI-generated voice clones. The court found that “Plaintiffs here use their voices in ways that are clearly separable from their identities and personalities. Their clients pay them to produce recordings of themselves narrating scripts, which the clients then own and use to produce content, as authorized by their contracts with Plaintiffs. As professional voice actors, Plaintiffs are not paid only for their ‘fame,’ but also ‘a negotiated and agreed-upon price for their professional services’, based at least in part on concrete vocal attributes like ‘tone, quality, timbre, and delivery.’ Plaintiffs’ putative marks—their voices—therefore serve dual functions as both ‘one of the most palpable ways identity is manifested,’ and as ordinary services in the voice-over market. . . . Plaintiffs’ voices are protectable only to the extent that they function primarily as source identifiers rather than as products themselves.” Click here for more information.