CapCut has changed the content of the Terms of Service, which, according to many experts, will make users around the world more or less worried. This change means that users will give users the permission to use not only the video, but also their faces, voices, and creative products... without any remuneration.
It is known that many people have expressed concern about this move and believe that this clause is effectively giving the platform permanent control over user content. Experts warn that this clause allows CapCut to control your personal content.
Ms. Claudia Sandino - Director at Omnivor, said: "CapCut can now re-license and transfer for use, copy, distribute, edit, adjust, make public and create works derived from your content".
Notably, the revised terms do not only apply to public posts when the company also declares rights to user-generated content, including voice, faces and images, regardless of whether the video is posted or not. Ms. Sandino warned: If users upload their own videos, or even just their voiceover, they can legally use that video in advertisements or other media without reporting or paying the users themselves.
Another worrying point is the permanent nature of this license, which means CapCut retains the copyright even after users delete their accounts. Ms. Sandino emphasized: CapCut goes beyond most other companies when declaring the right to use content that the creator often considers private or controlled.
With these terms, many users may feel uncomfortable, especially those who use CapCut for commercial work or customer work.
Currently, CapCut users have limited options, but the updated terms require anyone to default to agree with them. This may lead some to more creator-friendly platforms like Adobe Premiere or DaVinci Resolve.
CapCut, previously owned by ByteDance, is facing the risk of losing loyal users when switching from a creative tool to a distribution tool. ethically, companies like CapCut should publish their terms in clear language, provide non-participation options, and compensate creators when their content is profitable. Ms. Sandino concluded: Using their work without consent or payment is not only unethical but also an act of exploitation... this affects the future of creative ownership in general.
