Deeply concerned over new terms of service agreement

[ckuehne]

I was seeing that people were launching Photoshop and seeing an agreement they had to accept in order to launch it, and it sounded like anything at all being created or altered in Photoshop could be used by Adobe in any way they want. I did not see this same thing pop-up in After Effects, this morning. Does anyone know if this is being planned for After Effects as well? My concern is that clients will not allow me to use After Effects, at all, if any footage I use in it is being sent to Adobe to be used however they like.

[erinferinferinf]

Hello again!

So interestingly, you posted this message in a Photoshop Developer forum at first, so I thought you were, perhaps, a plugin developer hoping to use AI scraping, or some other use case. Your message has since been transferred to Cloud Services, which is more appropriate...

That said, here's Scott Belsky's message on the matter:  https://twitter.com/scottbelsky/status/1611428476736704514 

You (and other users) have the right to opt-out of allowing Adobe to use your content for product development and product improvement via the privacy panel which is linked from the Content Analysis FAQ (https://helpx.adobe.com/manage-account/using/machine-learning-faq.html) and which has been in existence for nearly a decade.

Adobe's AI is not trained on user content. I don't think that external AIs are able to scrape your Creative Cloud Library data...

[Test Screen Name]

Assuming you mean external (non-Adobe) AI scrapers: AI scrapers will potentially scrape everything whatever the privacy policy, if they find it. They can't scrape private pages that are not publicly readable. If you put something on any cloud and share a link, it can be scraped.

[Nadja23577450hag3]

How is it with Adobe Portfolio sites? What about password protected adobe portfolio sites? Can they be scraped by Stable Diffusion etc.?

[Nancy OShea]

@Nadja23577450hag3,

It's the same with ALL websites.  If the site/pages are behind a strict password barrier, nobody can reach it without the password.  Neither bots, nor search engine crawlers nor humans.  But once admitted, anyone with a mind to can take content by searching the site's code, grabbing a screenshot or examining Internet files stored in their browser's memory.

Stable Diffusion sites are more likely to use artistic styles by famous artists with name recognition like Cezzanne, Matisse or Monet. There isn't much demand for works by un-known artists unless a human intentionally uploads an unknown image for the AI to sample.  In short, bots don't steal, humans do.

Hope that helps.

[violetazuro12756694]

Hi, Van Gogh never made any money on this art when he was alive. Cezzane and Matisse were old siders too. We can't know whose style will be valued in the future. Plus if you use an image from Getty or other paid resource like a modest picture of praying hands your site can fined a good amount of money.  Adobe has a team of talented developers why don't you come - up with a plugin like Glaze for photoshop? See Washington Post Article : "Artists are fleeing Instagram to keep their work out of Meta’s AI" Meta is training its AI on artists’ creations. June 6, 2024

[kglad]

to report bugs or ideas or wishes to adobe: for applicable apps, use https://helpx.adobe.com/ie/x-productkb/global/how-to-user-voice.html

for createive cloud assets:

bugs, https://community.adobe.com/t5/adobe-collaboration-experiences/ct-p/ct-adobe-collaboration-experienc...

requests, https://community.adobe.com/t5/adobe-collaboration-experiences/ct-p/ct-adobe-collaboration-experienc...

for others, use https://www.adobe.com/products/wishform.html

if neither show a place to report the issue, just leave it here. that's the best you can do.

[Nancy OShea]

What are your concerns exactly?  Can you provide some examples?

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

Hi Everyone, please read this update from Scott Belsky. Adobe is listening.

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/10/updating-adobes-terms-of-use

[stefmon]

https://9to5mac.com/2024/06/06/change-to-adobe-terms-amp-conditions/
Maybe someone at Adobe did, but seems like higher up there has been some kind of VETO since this is the latest thing
"Solely for the purposes of operating or improving the Services and Software, you grant us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free sublicensable, license, to use, reproduce, publicly display, distribute, modify, create derivative works based on, publicly perform, and translate the Content. For example, we may sublicense our right to the Content to our service providers or to other users to allow the Services and Software to operate with others, such as enabling you to share photos"

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@stefmon This all has to do with cloud sharing - how do you expect the cloud service to allow you to store or share files with someone else if it cannot reproduce, display, distribute, modify, publicly perform (legalese for "work"), and translate your content?

[stefmon]

After searching a bunch more, I see that it's to this article that they are responding with the blog post.

[kglad]

@stefmon 

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use

<merged>

[jeffhalmos]

I do alot of NDA work. How do I tell my clients that their work could end up on the internet before the work is completed and the NDA removed because Adobe has decided they have the right to do as they wish with it?

[Timothy37885768mfi3]

I agree this is absolutely ridiculous 

[walth7384501]

Apparently this change has been in the TOS for months as well?

[John T Smith]

I don't do work for anyone else so I don't know... does that apply to files that are ONLY on your computer, or only to files that you store in Adobe's cloud?

[jeffhalmos]

So far most of the comments I can find on Reddit and AppleInsider (which did a great overview) suggest that it's cloud files only, which I don't use, but some have suggested that there's no reason Adobe couldn't gleen your locals.

This is the world AI will usher in: worse/less privacy, used against us in the name of legality and "the children."

[kglad]

sheesh, adobe can't even determine if you're using their apps.

[jeffhalmos]

People are trying to uninstall Adobe apps and are forced to agree to the terms in order to do so.

[Abambo]

People are trying to uninstall Adobe apps and are forced to agree to the terms in order to do so.

By @jeffhalmos

When they format the disk, they don't need to agree to anything! Don't tell them.

[Patryk Rozanski]

This is literaly a SCAM fraud from Adobe side.... 

[Abambo]

This is literaly a SCAM fraud from Adobe side.... 

By @Patryk Rozanski

What e-mail provider do you use?

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

Please read this response from Scott Belsky:

“(1) any modern cloud service has legal screening requirements like child exploitation imagery - the TOS ability to review is legally required for those who host content.
(2) the license required “solely for the purpose of operating…” is required to do basic things for customers, like making thumbnails, open a file on the Photoshop web app, index for search, etc. and when we support third-party integrations for workflows, that requires a sublicense.
(3) we have always used ML to improve masking, selection and other basic tools, but explicitly don’t train Firefly GenAI on customer content, it is trained on a licensed dataset with a customer compensation program that is well documented.”

“But I agree the summary wording is unclear and I’ve given that feedback to legal. the actual TOS are similar to any other modern software provider with cloud features that requires the service be able to ‘access’ a file — like when a user wants to open it on Photoshop web app, needs files indexed for search purposes, chooses to share a document for review online with a colleague, auto-tagging in Lightroom, or other cloud-enabled capabilities. And many of these capabilities technically require a license ‘solely for the purpose of operating’ as stated. Adobe has had something like this in TOS for over a decade."

In all honesty if you have highly sensitive NDA material you shouldn't be posting that in a cloud service in the first place. This isn't anything new - Adobe just poorly handled by forcing users to actually read the TOS.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

Clarification from Adobe:

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2024/06/06/clarification-adobe-terms-of-use

[jeffhalmos]

Glad they clarified. Still dicey, though. But whatevs. It's the way.