While we did not own all the rights to the software, when we purchased a full licensed copy we had some rights to our copy, and could modify it for personal use. We also had control over what was run, and when. Now with this new nickle and dime scheme, we have nothing. How many processes will now be running in a persistent background state? How many ports will have to be opened on your system, and will they be static or dynamic (aka how big of a secuirty hole will this be)? With the US and China representing 70%+ of all port sniffing activity, more open ports on a permanent basis means less security. If you work in an industrial setting where you have a network admin handling it for you, then you do not have much to worry about (the admin does). If you are a freelancer, well, perhaps Adobe will offer some security in the future. If you get hacked through their Cloud*, they will be liable for damages. But what happens when the DDoS attacks start on their Cloud? Do subscribers get refunds for downtime? I doubt it.
The claims that this is also cheaper are so laughable as to make you wonder if they did not pull a M$ Xbox-One, and just kneecap themselves. Most of us did not upgrade yearly, and that is what they are basing their claim of being cheaper on. Once that introductory pricing is over, the yearly cost is going to be more. Once they have 51% of current owners switched over to thier cloud, they will almost certainly hike the price far in excess of the rate of inflation on a yearly basis. So CS6 is it for the forseeable future. Perhaps in two more years they will have gone the way of M$ and retracted their stand on controlling their customers. I am not going to hold my breath though.
As for it not handling file type/versions - it is possible but if Adobe does that I am sure other software packages will either be able to convert the files or it might be worth grabbing something from Corel just to act as a bridge. It might be a bit of a pain, but it is far better than the major pain subscription is.
EULAs
Half of the clauses in most EULAs are non-enforceable. Contract law is different in every State and Country. The one thing they all share is that any contract that proposes to invalidate a fundamental right as established by a higher authority, such as State or Federal Law (e.g. The Consitution), is automatically invalid and can be ignored in it's entirity (that clause of the contract, not the entire contract). Many companies try to convince us that they own the rights to our DNA with their legalese-ridden End Looser Agreements, but if you know the laws of where you live, you will likely find that only the ones preventing illegal actions (selling copies or reverse engineering) are enforceable. The rest can be summarily ignored. There are even some Countries that are so fed-up with EULA nonesense they have ruled them completely unenforceable, as technically, they do not even constitute a proper contract. A click is not a signature, they are not dated, witnessed, or counter-signed. You also have no ability to modify the contract and submit back, and the basic rule of reciprocality, where both benefit from the agreement is usually ignored with the company claiming all the protection and benefits ('if our software burns your house down, it is not our fault'). Most companies also 'reserve the right to modify the EULA whenever they want' without even notifying you, as if you should visit that webpage every day just to make sure nothing changed. Any modified clause that is not at least initialized by you is unenforcable and invalidates the original clause as well, unless it was in your favour and then your copy of the contract stands as the legally binding version. It would be like your car delership calling to tell you they just retroactively cut their lifetime roadside assistance from your contract and that there is nothing you can do about it. It will be nice when our legal system gets tired of EULA nonesense and tosses them en-masse too. Most of the claims in an EULA fall under the standards of the Criminial Codes anyway, so it is just another attempt to convince you that the company in question has power over your purchase, when they do not.
In the subscription case, they do however, so pay special attention and save a copy of the original EULA that you click to accept, as that is the only legally binding version as that is the only one they could prove that you read. If they do force updated EULAs for you to re-click (what they consider signing), and you see something you do not like, they you can terminate your contract with no penalty as they changed the contract (unless your Country has a really strange legal system). If you do accept it again, then make sure to save a copy the new version. Adobe is one of the better companies, and I would not expect them to try some of the more laughable clauses that I have seen in past EULAs from other companies ('we are not responsible if our software does not function as stated' etc.).
*References
http://cloudtimes.org/2013/02/23/hacked-through-the-clouds/
http://cloudtimes.org/2013/02/16/fears-of-government-and-legal-intervention-slows-cloud-adoption/
35
Replies
AdChoices