ekZeppJun 10, 2024

What is Cara, the Instagram alternative that gained 600k users in a week?

https://lemmy.world/post/16375899

What is Cara, the Instagram alternative that gained 600k users in a week? - Lemmy.World

Key points: - Cara’s Rapid Growth: The app gained 600,000 users in a week - Artists Leaving Instagram: The controversy around Instagram using images to train AI led many artists to seek an alternative - Cara’s Features: The app is designed specifically for artists and offers a ‘Portfolio’ feature. Users can tag fields, mediums, project types, categories, and software used to create their work - While Cara has grown quickly, it is still tiny compared to Instagram’s massive user base of two billion. - Glaze Integration: Cara is working on integrating Glaze directly in the app to provide users with an easy way to protect their work from be used by any AI more about: https://blog.cara.app/blog/cara-glaze-about [https://blog.cara.app/blog/cara-glaze-about]

Show threadGrimy
According to their terms and service, everything uploaded to their website is then owned by them. Doesn’t seem very artist friendly to me.
Jun 10, 2024 at 11:21amWeb
Show threadekZeppJun 10, 2024
The Cara Site and all works of art (“Art”) and/or other user generated content (including without limitation commentary, images, third-party links, and similar content and/or works) (collectively the “Art And Other User Generated Content”), text, data, and other materials contained in the Cara Site are copyrighted unless otherwise noted and are the property of Cara and/or the individual artist who created any individual piece of Art And Other User Generated Content (the “Artist”). No such materials may be copied, reproduced, republished, modified or used in any way except as provided in these Terms and Conditions.
Show threadsnooggumsJun 10, 2024

the property of Cara and/or the individual artist

This seems worded to muddy the waters about who actually has the copyright.

Show threadScreaminOctopusJun 10, 2024
Monetization plan might be to sell prints of platformed artists work, with out any need for pesky royalties.
Show threadGrimyJun 10, 2024
Why did you specifically not put in bold this part and are the property of Cara. Clearly you saw it off you took the time to avoid putting stars around it.
Show threadBob1971Jun 10, 2024
Ok, the lady behind Cara just WON a f-ing copywrite lawsuit against some dick that stole her artwork. I'm 100% sure the wording is so if you *think* about stealing from Cara, she will come after your ass with both guns blazing.
Show threadGrimyJun 10, 2024

Regardless, their terms of service let’s Cara not only sell prints and your artwork to third parties but also let’s then sell your artwork for AI training if they wanted to.

Instagram for all it’s fault specifically says that they don’t own your artwork and only get a license to show it.

I don’t really care what she won, people tend to cave really fast if given proper financial incentive.

Show threadOsaErisXeroJun 10, 2024
No, it doesn't. It states that the copyrighted works are the property of Cara and/or the artist who created the Works, except where otherwise noted. This specifically would cover cases where someone attempts to claim that a Work they found on Cara isn't copyrighted because a copyright notice wasn't explicitly stated, and doesn't make explicit claims over the ownership of any arbitrary Work. For it to work in the way you're claiming, the "or" cannot be present as it being there implies the existence of Works on the site which Cara does not have property rights to. Who actually possesses the property rights to any given Work is left, apparently intentionally, ambiguous.
Show threadGeneral_EffortJun 10, 2024

cases where someone attempts to claim that a Work they found on Cara isn’t copyrighted because a copyright notice wasn’t explicitly stated

In what country is that a thing?

Show threadOsaErisXeroJun 10, 2024
None that I'm aware of, but for a copyright to be asserted a human must be associated with it as a consequence of the monkey selfie case. My reading is that this would cover the edge case of an anonymous, unknown poster submitting the work, allowing Cara to act as the default rights holder unless otherwise asserted by a person or user.
Show threadCringe2793Jun 11, 2024
Why are you twisting it to make it seem like Cara is doing a good thing? What’s your motive? What is the difference between Cara owning it by default and the uploader owning it by default? Why can’t it just be the owners property?
Show threadGeneral_EffortJun 11, 2024

It doesn’t work like that. The monkey selfie case did not set any kind of precedence. Animals cannot own property, including copyrights.

For a work to be under copyright in the US, it has to be an “original work of authorship” and contain “a modicum of creativity”. Some countries allow broader copyrights. Photographs that are accidentally triggered are public domain. CCTV footage is a gray area. Setting up a camera and luring animals into triggering it, might produce copyrighted images. A court would have to decide if the individual circumstances constitute authorship and a modicum of creativity. An animal snagging a camera and triggering it certainly doesn’t. The monkey selfie case did nothing to advance the law.

A public domain image is just that. Attempting to assert ownership over one is either an error or fraud. I don’t know what the US rules are when a rights-owner can’t be found. I doubt that you can just become the default owner of some property just by writing something on a website.

Show threadXNXJun 10, 2024
That’s not true
Show threadGrimyJun 10, 2024

???

The clause is literally a comment or so down and available on their website.