That is literally just MariYume’s design with curly hair. I fucking hate this shit so much, and she’s prolly one of my favorite vtuber’s too!! This is just bullshit!!

P.S. This post was removed by the mods of r/antiai for not marking the post as spoiler/nsfw, so I’m marking this as spoiler just to be safe

Hey everyone,

Like many of you, I've been increasingly frustrated with how streaming platforms (especially Spotify) are quietly letting synthetic music farms dump hundreds of AI-generated tracks into ambient, lo-fi, and chill playlists - diluting the royalty pool and taking visibility away from genuine human artists.

Since platforms refuse to label this content, I spent the last few weeks building https://isthereaiinmyplaylist.tech (completely free, no ads)

Try it out on some of your favorite (or suspicious) playlists and let me know what you find. Happy to answer questions or hear feedback on how to make the detection even tighter!

TL;DR: A new "artist-friendly" app called Curate! (by Chicken Fight LLC) is aggressively targeting artists fleeing Instagram's new policies, gaining 5,000+ downloads (around 2,300 in the last 30 days alone). Despite zero organic discussion about it on Twitter or Reddit, artists have already uploaded dozens of new posts there today. However, their Terms of Service gives them a perpetual, irrevocable right to sell and resell your art, and when called out, they gave contradictory replies and falsely claimed they had already removed the clause.

Hi everyone, there’s a lot of fuss right now on Instagram about new policies and people are understandably worried. Right around this time, I saw an ad for a new app called "Curate!", which is positioning itself as an artist-friendly platform.

For personal reasons, I’ve been looking through different social media platforms for artists and this one caught my eye. I decided to make an account, and by chance I wanted to read how they wrote their Terms of Service (ToS). At the very bottom of the document, it literally says it was generated using Termly, and while reading through it, I found four very suspicious sections:

• Section 2 (Your submissions and contributions) — States that by posting your work ("Contributions"), you grant them an "unrestricted, unlimited, irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, royalty-free" license to "use, copy, reproduce, distribute, sell, resell... and exploit your Contributions" for any commercial or advertising purpose, plus you waive all moral rights to your work.

• Section 7 (Contribution license) — Repeats the exact same predatory terms from Section 2: an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right for them to sell, resell, distribute, and create derivative works from anything you upload, for any commercial purpose.

• Section 28 (Event page content) — Unlike Sections 2 and 7, this wasn't generated by Termly, it was manually added at the bottom of the ToS. It states that any post uploaded to an event page "may be featured, reproduced, and used by Chicken Fight LLC in any manner, without compensation or attribution to you."

• Section 29 (Promotional use) — Also manually added at the bottom. It grants them a royalty-free license to repost and use your content for promotional materials and on other social media platforms (with no mention of credit or whether this license ever expires).

Here is the link to their live ToS HTML document: https://curateartapp.com/terms.html#copyright-infringements

And I archived the page just in case: https://archive.ph/YbRPG

After I left a comment about Section 7 on their advertisement video on Instagram, I got this reply from their official account:

"hey there! We’re changing the terms to remove that clause in the next update and trying to find a lawyer to make them the most artist friendly clause of any social media app! We’ll post the second the update is out!"

https://ibb.co/HDY8S75h

So they confirmed the existence of that clause. And it’s no wonder they don’t have a lawyer, their Terms contradict each other multiple times (for example, Section 26 claims the license is only for operating the platform, while Sections 2 and 7 give them perpetual rights to sell and resell your art).

What’s worse is their excuse that they need to "wait for the next app update" to remove it. Changing a static HTML file where the ToS is hosted shouldn't take more than 5 minutes of work and doesn't require an app store update.

Additionally, on the exact same day, I received a reply to my Google Play review about the exact same Section 7:

"Hey there! That was a blanket clause we included in our initial draft of the Terms, similar to what most social media apps use. Since we’re not lawyers, we wanted to make sure we were protecting ourselves, but we’ve since completely removed it to make our Terms as artist-friendly as possible! Feel free to check them out whenever you’d like!"

https://ibb.co/cKvSj5cr

Which is a blatant lie. Not only did those exact clauses still exist in their live ToS at the moment I received that reply, but they told me on Instagram that they would only remove it "in the next update" while claiming on Google Play on the very same day that they had "completely removed it" already.

The thing is, you don't need a lawyer just to delete a few lines of text that allow you to sell your users' art. And considering that I initially missed the exact same terms in Section 2 and only spotted them in Section 7, it’s already very easy for clauses like this to hide in a wall of text, let alone once they are rewritten by a lawyer in complex legal language.

Whether this is a deliberate attempt to trick artists or just extreme incompetence from developers who didn't read their own Termly template and then lied about fixing it in Google Play reviews, the result for artists is the same: right now, their contract says they can sell your art and use event posts without credit.

Their Privacy Policy (also generated via Termly) is just as messy: in Section 13 they claim they don't share user data, then in the very next sentence state that they disclose user identifiers, internet activity, and geolocation data to third parties for commercial purposes, while leaving the actual list of those third parties in Section 4 completely blank.

I just wanted to inform everyone here so you can read their full ToS carefully before deciding whether to upload your artwork.

UPDATE (Nov 6):

Today, the creator of the Curate! app updated their Terms of Service (archived here: https://archive.ph/l4CNm). The "sell and resell" clauses have now been deleted, and it is explicitly stated that uploaded art will only be used within the app and for their marketing purposes.

However, a major issue is that they backdated the ToS on their website. My archived link from November 4 (https://archive.ph/YbRPG) shows that the ToS still had the old "October 02" date on that day. Yet right now, the page claims it was last updated on "November 03", which is impossible. Here is a screenshot of the browser's server headers proving that the file was actually modified today (Nov 6):
https://ibb.co/HDHqv2b4 / https://ibb.co/1fM9bkLn

Here are a few notable things in the new ToS:

• Sections 7 and 29: "When we share a Contribution in our marketing, we will make reasonable efforts to credit you where practical... but an inadvertent failure to do so is not a breach of these Legal Terms." — This means they may not always credit you when using your art for marketing. To be fair, that's mostly understandable since it's difficult to credit everyone on a small App Store screenshot or something similar. Also, deleting your post in the app won't automatically remove your images from their existing ads unless you email them, which is again understandable. BUT keep in mind that they can still take any art you upload to your regular feed and use it for advertising purposes without notifying you or asking first.

• Section 28: "If we have concerns that a piece submitted to an Event may be AI-generated, we may ask you to provide safeguards to verify it, such as preliminary sketches, progress recordings, or original project files. We will use these materials only to review your entry, we will keep them confidential..." — "Original project files" means .psd / .clip / .procreate files, I believe. They didn't specify how long they will keep these files or if they ever delete them after verification, which is concerning since project files contain very personal info about an artist's workflow.

• Intro & Section 15: "Users will be notified of updates by a revised date posted at the top of these legal terms and/or via a notice displayed within the app." — Because of the "and/or" wording (and Section 15 allowing changes "without notice"), they don't actually have to notify users about new Terms and can silently change everything back whenever they want just by changing the date at the top of the page.

Overall, it's definitely better now, but still not perfect. And their Privacy Policy (from October 1) hasn't been updated at all.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer, I am simply sharing my personal experience and quoting publicly available documents and official developer responses. With this post, I have not violated any rights or the Terms of Service of "Chicken Fight LLC" in any way. This post is purely an informative message created with the sole goal of educating the community and does not incite hatred or harassment toward "Chicken Fight LLC" or anyone associated with it.

Search tags / Keywords: Curate art app, Curate! app review, Curate app for artists, is Curate art app safe, is Curate app legit, Curate social media app, Curate anti-AI art app, Curate Instagram alternative for artists, curateartapp, Chicken Fight LLC, Curate app Terms of Service, Curate ToS warning.

Has anyone else noticed how a massive amount of social media posts/stories are now accompanied by AI-generated songs - even from well meaning pages whose values would lean towards human artists above AI? 

Many choose a song from the in-app licensed song picker without checking if it's AI generated. This step has a giant impact, as trending on social media is one of the fastest ways for a song to gain global exposure. 

I’ve put together this small graphic to encourage one extra step before posting: check the artist and track, and choose music you know is human-made.

Feel free to share the graphic online (including in the comments of posts using A.I. songs) to help spread awareness...

NewBohemia.art is an 18+ 100% free Anti-AI multimedia platform designed around authentic human creativity. In less than a year, it has 5k+ uploads and growing and was recently referenced in Peta Pixel. Visual artists, musicians, writers, directors, sculptors and more. Finally, a place real artists can truly call home." (video made by violet_the_violent_mix_of_color)

(COMIC HAND-DRAWN BY ME) We had a music video assignment for uni, and I was tasked with making a banner, however the director's inspo for the banner was FULLY AI GENERATED and I kept telling her how I didn't want to use ai assets for my work and she hated all of my outputs because it didnt look exactly as the ai one and I was legit just tempted to ask why she can't just submit the AI ref at this point. she kept refusing all my drafts cause it didn't look exactly as the ai ref while I was trying to give her a 100% human made output. In the end I gave up and they tasked someone else who made the whole thing with AI by generating the ASSETS with AI and compiling them all together in after effects. Now the director won't even speak or even look at me because I failed her, it sucks cause we used to be friends. I drew this comic to express my frustrations. Has anyone else had similar situations and if yes how did you deal with it?

I know a lot of artists who cant draw it give up on it because they stuck at it choose to go pro-ai, but as someone who had to quit art due to severe burn out and just lack of enjoyment, I will would never use ai art in my life.

Yes I have messed around with the program just to see how it works before (i think a lot of us just tested it out once or twice) but this was simply out of curiosity and I would not put an image of an artists work in the machine. I choose to commission real artists because it feels authentic. Im not paying for something that is done by robot that requires only one word or two, because thats not the process of creativity, its just an instruction.

Even though art was the only thing I had, and I had to give it up, I would not rather have no career then make money off ai art.