[Locked] No perpetual licenses are you serious?

[Mattrman]

I just head that Adobe was planning to abandon its perpetual license in favor of an on line only rental program. At first I thought that this must be a joke. I have been using adobe products for 18 years. Primarily Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign. I am currently an owner of CS 6 Master collection and obviously do upgrade my products and have consistently done so over the years. I am not connected to the internet full time and in fact my work computer is never directly connected to the internet. So how does this work? Is adobe now forcing me to connect to the internet - it seems that this is the case.

In regards to upgrade cycles, I dont want to rent my software and be tied to a rental agreement. I want to upgrade when I choose, not rent my software like some kind of loaner program!

I want to purchase the software then not worry about it. For instance when I travel, I dont want to be bogged down with downloads and upgrades chewing up my bandwidth. I have traveled to many places where internet access is very limited. Downloading from a wireless card in China is painful, I dont want to be bogged down with no software or large megabyte downloads costing me a fortune on the other side of the planet.

Adobe I know that I am just one person and you will probably not listen to me but did someone ask? No one asked me about this. How simple could this be - I want to buy the software then use it when I want where I want, is this too much to ask?

Please let me continue to use this software in the way that I have used it for so long. If others wish to have the creative cloud then great! More power to them, don't alienate your other users. Please provide both alternatives.

Best regards - Matt

[Jim_Simon]

Oh really Jim? This is now the great reason why everyone should bow down and accept what Adobe is doing?

Not at all.  I'm just saying I'm not convinced the courts would consider the project file your "intellectual property".  The export I can understand, the project file I question.

It's a little different with text and word documents, as they contain the actual work itself.  But a PP or AE project file does not.  It contains only references to the work you own the rights to.

[Jao vdL]

Not at all. I'm just saying I'm not convinced the courts would consider the project file your "intellectual property".

Of course they will, this is not even slightly controversial. Any file you create with any software (even rented software!) using your creative capabilities is your intellectual property. The software house has absolutely no claim to it's contents whatsoever nor over the physical bits in the file. That would be as crazy as the makers of a new kind of bolt and nut scheme (say pentagonal instead of hex nuts) somehow owning the bridge that you built using their bolts. The content of files you create with Adobe software are your intellectual property. Nobody else's. It is even the case that it is explicitely legal to reverse engineer the file format for interoperability purposes even if the creator of the file format chooses to not document it. This was settled quite a while ago. Adobe cannot, even if it wanted to, prevent others from writing importers and exporters for their file formats, which is why the psd format is read and written by lots of software.

[bababongatwo]

> Jim Simon

You know exactly that it´s meant this way (or it´s nitpicking):

You OWN the right to use the software (as long as you want/lifelong) with CS6

and

You own the right to use the software only if you pay for it every month.

IT IS AN BIG DIFFERENCE between CS6 and CC

You OWN NOTHING after subscription.

[pknight11]

So, by that argument Microsoft owns every .doc file and every .xls file, etc., ever created, and the paying customers only own the print-outs and the reflected light from the screens upon which we project our PowerPoint presentations.  On second thought, Texas Instruments probably owns the light, so PP users end up with nothing.

OR, perhaps the software is a tool, that the software publisher owns the code to, and licenses to users to CREATE new code, that the users then own.  That is, my files are created with Microsoft or Adobe code, and I pay for the use of that code to create new "stuff" that these companies have no legitimate claim to owing.  That includes the files on the disc.

This is would be no different than Canon claiming they own my photos because they were created as .CR2 files.  Utter rubbish.

[Guest]

Interesting argument this....

If I was driving down the road with the company camera in my car (outside of work hours) and I saw and photographed a UFO... who owns the picture? ... the camera is not mine...so does the company own the shot

If I created a very successful busines using adobe products (which I now do not own but rent) could Adobe argue that they own a percentage of the business? ...most people would argue no.... but if they put it in the EULA and you agreed to those terms.. they could be part owners..

In other business ie acting and model agencies (which are essentially services) ... the agency does own a percentage of what the client makes...

Based on Adobe's behaviour I suspect if they see an avenue for making money they will squeeze it... which is not the adobe I grew up with

[pknight424]

The courts would have something to say about Adobe claiming any ownership of work done with their prooducts, and as has been explained elsewhere in this thead Adobe would not have a leg to stand on.  Which takes me back to the idea that they may also be in a bit of trouble if they block access to your intellectual property created with their tools.

[CarlosCanto]

Jim Simon wrote:

Possibly because it's not a valid argument.  While you may own the rights to the original media, and the edited export, the project file itself is Adobe code, owned by them and licensed by you.

So your IP is what goes in and what comes out.  What's in between belongs to Adobe.

really? I'm not EULA expert but what you said makes no sense, worst thing is even if that was the case you seem to have no problem with it.

[Jim_Simon]

I'm not EULA expert but what you said makes no sense

It's not about the EULA, it's about copyright law.  In the US, copyright exists when a work is set down in a permanent form.  You could argue that the project file is permanent, and you might be right, I don't know for sure.  But you can't watch a project file.  I can see an interpretation that says the export is the 'work', not the project file itself.

[bababongatwo]

> Jim Simon

That´s totally wrong.

Adobe isn´t the owner of a project file (...and you licensed that).

Adobe is the owner of the file-formating - that´s all.

As they gave you the right to create files with their software, the file/project itself is yours.

(Elsewise Adobe would have the right to take it back/delete it - total nonsense)

But it´s clearly right: You never OWN the software (If your Name is not Apple, MS or Adobegant), but you can OWN a license.

And that changed dramatically with the BS of CashCow.

You OWN NOTHING after subscription.

No further right of usage.

That´s it in simple.

[Biggles_Lamb]

You are on a hiding to nothing trying to convince the CC subscribers that they, by their lack of forward understanding of the future issues will be acutally perpetuating the CC.

I have said it many times in many posts...............CC subscribers have their heads stuck so far up their own clouds that the sun is shining.

Just accept that their opinion differs, just accept that your CS software will work OK for many years to come, just accept that the enhancements of the CC programs are "nice to have but not essential", just accept that the CCers are going to beta test every single update on their systems, just accept that you will be substantially better off financially by not allowing the hype of a not wanted system to take you over, in other words .....live long and prosper

Tongue removed from cheek

Col

[Andy_Bay]

Biggles Lamb,  I personally accept all those things and agree with them.

But I also believe there are people who haven't decided what they should think about the cloud. For their sake I think it's important to debunk all the Adobe marketing hype. There is so much misinformation and smoke and mirrors on Adobe's part. I believe in educating people and giving them the facts.

Of course, some people posting here, without mentioning any names, fit your metaphor perfectly. Those people can not be convinced with any kinds of facts.  But those are not really the people we are targeting our messages to. We might answer their posts, but the target audience for those answers is all the undecided customers. It also warms my heart to see the hundreds of people here that are not buying the bs. It's nice to know we have a very wide front in this battle.

Finally let me add this: while some of my messages might sound hostile towards Adobe, I'm actually still hoping that this company will succeed. I just honestly believe this is not the way to do that. Not by force Adobe. No company, not even Adobe, can force customers to act against their will. This is a path to desctruction. To succeed in the future they need to kick out of the people behind this extortion and go into a serious damage repair mode. To succeed they need to LISTEN to what customers are asking for. I want the old Adobe back. It was once a company that I loved and was marketing to hundreds of my students.

[Biggles_Lamb]

Andy

My comments were not aimed at you but At BABA

Based on my own experience trying to convince Jim otherwise his comments towards Jim will never change Jim's opinion, I have respect for Jim's views and knowledge but as far as the CC is concerned replying to any of Jim's posts is a complete waste of time, he is intrangient in his posts, I do not see anything changing that other than Adobe advising next year of a 10% hike in prices followed by another 10% hike the year after, then thoughts may change

But otherwise I totally agree with you.

Whilst I do wish Adobe success I do not want that success to be by charging extortionate prices for their products.

Yes the CC does seem great for new users and those wth cash to effectively waste on a non perpetual product, but for existing users it sucks.

Keep up the campaining

Col

[bababongatwo]

Understand, that I will not change (most of) CCers minds.

But when they start to turn the facts (like math-making CC = cheaper than CS), I simply will not be quiet.

I find these arguments in many threats - not only here - and I think, there are lots of potential users searching for objective information.

If you will not point out the truth, they eventually make dicisions based on wrong information.

I´m old enough to understand, that I can´t change peoples minds, who "...have their heads stuck so far up their own clouds that the sun is shining."

So again:
As Adobe planes to raise income with only half of their (former) customers, htH it should work to make the products cheaper???

You OWN NOTHING after subscription, You have to FOLLOW HARDWARE requirements of Adobe, The cloud isn´t a cloud, Betatester,...

----------

CC = Cash Cow = Terminating the word "Archive" in digital future = Lifelong dependency = NoGo = Never

[Brntoki]

As for the license/ownership/lack-of-ownership issue: It really is simple, I think.

Nothing has changed. I own my creations; it is my intellectual property. I have a license to use Adobe's software to edit/get my creations on screen/paper/whatever. I do not own the code that I license the right to use.

Nothing has changed in those regards. The change is this:

Before, I paid a fee that let me license the right to use Adobe's software for as long as I can get it to run on my system (with Adobe being responsible to ensure it runs on systems they claim support for).

Now, I pay a fee for a license for the exact same thing, but my license has a meter running on it and when it runs out, that's it until I renew it.

Ownership and rights haven't changed at all, as such. It's only that my rights are revoked when the meter hits zero now, whereas before I didn't have to worry about any revokation.

And to flog that dead and decaying horse at least on more time . . . this gets into an ethical issue, because there is the essence of the Adobe code hooking into my work, and, when the meter hits zero, it effectively is a tire lock for which I MUST pay Adobe to remove.

[Guest]

Adobe, look what you've made us become. Creatives fighting creatives. Parking at meters and fighting turf wars. Are you happy now?

[Biggles_Lamb]

There have been dozens of posts about the math involved about the pros and cons, and many CCers just cannot fathom basic addition as not one has posted an effective financial analysis for existing CS users

For a new user to Adobe products then CC is probably the right choice up to a point in a few years when the costs equalize and then cross over to make CS cheaper (assuming to increase in subscription)

It is the long established users who are being ripped off, the fact that I cannot understand is that the CCers will be paying more for the CC than a CS update yet they blindly pay, now that makes no sense at all.

Adobes track record of bug free major updates and ongoing bug fixes are not good fo essentially all CCers have now become Beta testers.

Col

[Andy_Bay]

There is another HUGE downside to Creative Cloud that is just now being fully realized:

With CS6 a company could buy the software, and several employees could use it when needed, as long as two persons were not using it simultaneously. Or as another example, with CS6 my wife could use the software when I was not using it.

With CC, every single user of the software needs a license. Both me and my wife need separate licenses in order to legally use the software.

That's a pretty massive price increase right there!

[cc_merchant]

when the meter hits zero, it effectively is a tire lock for which I MUST pay Adobe to remove.

That is why I prefer to park on my driveway, instead of on the street with a meter.

[Brntoki]

cc_merchant wrote:

That is why I prefer to park on my driveway, instead of on the street with a meter.

Yep. And that's why I've been busier than normal over the last month, trying to figure out the best way to repave my driveway: Stuff I used to use is no longer viable. But, as I've found out in my research, it's no longer necessary either, so . . .

True story: I opened up Photoshop today and was lost for a brief moment. I've already begun to forget what's where in the UI. AWESOME!!!

[TheCoroner9]

Brntoki wrote:

As for the license/ownership/lack-of-ownership issue: It really is simple, I think.

Nothing has changed. I own my creations; it is my intellectual property. I have a license to use Adobe's software to edit/get my creations on screen/paper/whatever. I do not own the code that I license the right to use.

Nothing has changed in those regards. The change is this:

Before, I paid a fee that let me license the right to use Adobe's software for as long as I can get it to run on my system (with Adobe being responsible to ensure it runs on systems they claim support for).

Now, I pay a fee for a license for the exact same thing, but my license has a meter running on it and when it runs out, that's it until I renew it.

Ownership and rights haven't changed at all, as such. It's only that my rights are revoked when the meter hits zero now, whereas before I didn't have to worry about any revokation.

And to flog that dead and decaying horse at least on more time . . . this gets into an ethical issue, because there is the essence of the Adobe code hooking into my work, and, when the meter hits zero, it effectively is a tire lock for which I MUST pay Adobe to remove.

Guess again - when you are in the Cloud they can monitor and remove your material for any reason.

From the license agreement that Andy Bay posted an excerpt from over in the Adobe Max thread:

15.1 Adobe, in its sole discretion, may (but has no obligation to) monitor or review the Services and Materials at any time. Without limiting the foregoing, Adobe shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to remove any of Your Material for any reason (or no reason), including if it violates the Terms or any Law.

This deal is getting worse all the time - Lando Calrissian.

[FastFeet]

Today I received an advertisement email from Adobe stating:

"Join the over 650,000 creative professionals who’ve already made the switch to Creative Cloud* and get everything you need to create, collaborate, and publish all in one place. And with a Creative Cloud membership, you’ll always have the most advanced design features the minute they become available."

At the Q2 earnings Adobe stated 770,000 subscribers. Why do the state 120,000 less? Did 120,000 early adopters not continue the subscription?

[Was DYP]

Marcus Koch wrote:

Today I received an advertisement email from Adobe stating:

"Join the over 650,000 creative professionals who’ve already made the switch to Creative Cloud* and get everything you need to create, collaborate, and publish all in one place. And with a Creative Cloud membership, you’ll always have the most advanced design features the minute they become available."

At the Q2 earnings Adobe stated 770,000 subscribers. Why do the state 120,000 less? Did 120,000 early adopters not continue the subscription?

Yes and you’ll always have the latest bugs the minute they become available.

The big question when will these bugs be fixed.

PS hang when selecting tools. Same problem as CS6 not fixed in years.

ID very slow performance. CC has been out for 1 month now and still not fixed. Obviously not tested before release.

Acorbat not using monitor profile results in not accurate colors. Goes back two versions and not fixed in years.

When Adobe shows an interest in fixing bugs I might show an interest in CC.

I can very well imagine the 120,000 got fed up with the problems of CC and quit. At less that 10% getting hooked on the cloud even less incentive to fix anything?

At least one good thing about CC, if the software you get is not what Adobe promises you can always stop payment without having made a huge perpetual license payment.

[Brntoki]

TheCoroner9 wrote:

Guess again - when you are in the Cloud they can monitor and remove your material for any reason.

From the license agreement that Andy Bay posted an excerpt from over in the Adobe Max thread:

15.1 Adobe, in its sole discretion, may (but has no obligation to) monitor or review the Services and Materials at any time. Without limiting the foregoing, Adobe shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to remove any of Your Material for any reason (or no reason), including if it violates the Terms or any Law.

This deal is getting worse all the time - Lando Calrissian.

Guess I was right before:

"All your pixels are belong to us."

-Your Friendly Adobe Dictator --- "Ha. Ha. Ha. - Ha. Ha. Ha. - Ha. Ha. Ha."

[Guest]

This deal is getting worse all the time - Lando Calrissian.

Ya know, just yesterday I heard a commercial come on the TV in the other room for something stating "We give you choices...because we believe our customers come first." and I couldn't help but keep thinking, in the land of Adobe, there are no choices.

Way to go Adobe. Way to build a business. Way to be an example to our upcoming generation of creatives. And way to make the world a better place......for you and only you.

[FrannieKN]

But Adobe is giving us a choice... monthly or annually. Oh, and our third choice of "none of the above, thank you."