Jeff Geerling recently expressed his concerns about unauthorized use of his voice through AI technology in a blog post titled "They stole my voice with AI." He discovered that Elecrow, a company he had previously collaborated with, had used an AI-generated voice that closely resembled his own to narrate promotional videos without his consent. This revelation came after a viewer alerted him to the Elecrow video, which featured a voice that sounded familiar but was not his own. Geerling noted that he had a positive history with Elecrow, having reviewed their products in the past, and he hoped that the use of his voice was an unintentional mistake. However, he raised significant ethical concerns about the implications of AI voice cloning, especially given the lack of legal precedents addressing unauthorized use of someone's voice. He referenced a notable case, Midler vs. Ford, which established that using someone's voice in commercial works without consent is illegal. In his post, Geerling emphasized the importance of respecting creators' rights and suggested that companies should hire voiceover artists or collaborate with content creators rather than resorting to voice cloning. He expressed his intention to reach out to Elecrow to request the removal of the videos featuring the AI-generated voice and to clarify whether they had intentionally trained the AI on his content. The blog post also included updates on the situation, indicating that he had received a response from Elecrow's CEO, which he planned to address in a follow-up post. Geerling's experience highlights the growing concerns surrounding AI technology and its potential to infringe on individual rights, particularly in the realm of content creation and personal branding. In the comments section, readers shared their thoughts, with many expressing outrage at Elecrow's actions and offering support to Geerling. Some suggested that the use of AI voice cloning without consent is a serious ethical violation, while others pointed out the broader implications of such technology in the digital landscape. Overall, Geerling's situation serves as a cautionary tale about the intersection of technology, ethics, and intellectual property rights in the age of AI.