• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
9

P: Discussion on Photoshop’s new terms of service/use

New Here ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I see this headline

 

"Photoshop’s new terms of service require users to grant Adobe access to their active projects for “content moderation” and other purposes"


This is not real.... Is it??
All I can say guys is that if we cannot protect our IP from external scrutiny, we will have to find a different software package.

That will be unfortunate, because we have been in Adobe universe for 20+ years.  But y'all don't own our process, or our art, and y'all dont have the right to fine tooth examine our process.  You could ask for it, and you would probably get plenty of information, but being forced to allow this kind of monitoring, guys, this is unethical and unacceptable.

I hope your leadership considers this very carefully.  You will lose long term customers over this kind of action.

 

 

TOPICS
macOS , Web , Windows

Views

5.8K

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Community Expert , Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Everyone please read this update from Scott Belsky. More to come. Adobe is listening.

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

Votes

Translate

Translate

correct answers 1 Pinned Reply

Adobe Employee , Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Hey, @atnajoy

 

We understand your concerns and recommend visiting our blog post for clarification on our Terms of Use update: https://adobe.ly/3yOKzop

 

Thanks!
Sameer K

Votes

Translate

Translate
Adobe
Community Expert ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I can't really imagine them remotely accessing your computer to examine your files. I reluctantly clicked ok to this, but yes, I'm a bit wary of the general direction things are taking.

 

There is currently a controversy over Meta accessing user data for ai-training. But that's different, that's data already residing on their servers. They already have it and they are already using/selling it. A legal case is currently being prepared by several European countries against Meta.

 

Make no mistake, I'm deeply concerned about eroding privacy. But I think we have much bigger problems than Adobe.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

>I can't really imagine them remotely accessing your computer to examine your files. 

 

You consented to Adobe examining what you're working on at the moment, which seems quite serious enough, given that our professional and legal future is entirely in the hands of a so-called "AI" and a group of unknown people of varying and indeterminate value systems.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You must not get out much. Every time you get in your car, you put your life in the hands of that stranger coming down the road at 45mph in the oncoming lane. When you eat at a restaurant you trust that the cook doesn't accidentally poison you. Etc etc etc.

All this amounts to is [abuse removed] a bunch of people who have no understanding of the situation at hand.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jun 08, 2024 Jun 08, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This is the worst take I've read all month

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

i literally made an account just to tell you to stop simping for adobe. egregiously terrible take.

 

there is no reason why a company should be able to access your private files and hold your creative work hostage to do so by making you agree to terms you cannot opt out of. you have to agree to them before cancelling your subscription (whoops there goes your data regardless) and even then cancelling is a nightmare. 

 

[Removed by moderator]

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

quote

i literally made an account just to tell you to stop simping for adobe. egregiously terrible take.

 

there is no reason why a company should be able to access your private files and hold your creative work hostage to do so by making you agree to terms you cannot opt out of. you have to agree to them before cancelling your subscription (whoops there goes your data regardless) and even then cancelling is a nightmare. 

 

[Removed by moderator]


By @Anya37953581ccfi

Your conduct is highly inappropriate. I recommend you apologize. 

 

As for the issue at hand: Have you read the clarification? 

Screenshot 2024-06-10 at 17.44.34.png

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Except everything you just posted is incorrect.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Here is the problem: despite the suite being one that have been using since the 1990s, Adobe has strayed far from its trustworthy former self. They may well still not access our work or train AI on it, but the legal language (yes, I have read the clarification-it is not the contract itself and therefore of less value legally) is not as definitive of my rights as it should be. Do I think that they are accessing my images right now? Perhaps, but unlikely. Will they in the future: I am all but certain of it. That is the trajectory of big tech (I don't think I need to provide examples as they are legion). And a careful reading of their language leaves that as a possibility.
I still hope they will clean up the language and continue to be of use to so many, but I am trialling several other cheaper options for photographers. ON1, for example, is a one time purchase and has an excellent transfer workflow for your catalogues (ok, catalogs, for US writers).
It's all about trust. Who among the bros and the Apple, Adobe etc. crowd can you trust?
I know what my answer is, unfortunately.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Im also deeply concerned about this, considering it seems to give Adobe the ability to arbitrarily remove our access to the software we pay for for anything they deem to be a TOS violation. I would really like to see some clarification about how and when they would be accessing your content. Also apparently this change has been in place for months!?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@walth7384501 Any Sas/Cloud service has the right to terminate access due to TOS violations - thats not egregious or uncommon. The "change" was rephrasing existing terms that have been there since at least 2020.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm not sure the fact that they've been there since 2020 makes it better.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@000egg000 @walth7384501 Nothing has changed with the terms - Adobe made the mistake of saying the quiet parts out loud.

The rest of the orignal article blows over this point: “A separate “content analysis” FAQ from Adobe says that it “performs content analysis only on content processed or stored on Adobe’s servers; we don’t analyze content processed or stored locally on your device.“

 

https://helpx.adobe.com/manage-account/using/machine-learning-faq.html

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

nothing changed, sure, People are not upset over the "change" they are upset with the Terms in general. They just finally found out how terrible they are.  Adobe's "clarrifications" don't help. Instead of saying yes our stuff is oveerreaching and we will fix it, they make a suplimental non legal binding document saying "trust us bro".

This video sums it up pretty clearly

[link removed by moderator - see guidelines on posting misleading information]

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

<sigh> if only people were as outraged at meta, google, apple, microsoft, etc etc etc...then we might get somewhere.

 

@PlottingPixels Do you use Chrome? That's something to worry about.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied



quote

<sigh> if only people were as outraged at meta, google, apple, microsoft, etc etc etc...then we might get somewhere.

 

@PlottingPixelsDo you use Chrome? That's something to worry about.


By @D Fosse

 

You must have missed the news, people are outraged at them... There have many many recent mass cancelations, Microsoft and Unity specifically.

And how is that an argument to say "these guys are evil so we can be evil too?"

And to answer your question, No I don't use Chrome. Only time I do is when I am using a VM running it to test code.  and again, just because one company is worse, doesnt mean that you shouldnt pay attention to companies that are "slightly worse"

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 09, 2024 Jun 09, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Just because people are outraged doesn't make them right.  Blowing this up into an issue of moral "evil" is silly. In order for Adobe to provide the kinds of cloud-based-computing services [Generative Fill, Remove Tool, Neural Filters, Select Subject, etc] they need to access and temporarily store the image you're working on and use AI to examine and interrogate it, just to give you the quality results you expect.  

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Then they should update the terms and conditions to be less vague/overreaching and more specifically for that. 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This is a big nothingburger. Same terms every cloud/socila media provider has. CYA move is all.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jun 10, 2024 Jun 10, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

this is not a nothingburger, you literally just have no important data that you dont want scraped and sold to companies

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I also just read it on Twitter and wasn't aware of it, whether it has changed or not. I am now over 2 days of my 14 days trial and if they don't let me out, I am warned the rest of my whole life to never spend any monay again to this company to which prodcut or ever. What a mess.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

@CreativeElk So you are basing your decision on the fact that you didn't cancel before the end of your trial? What would you expect from any company that offers a limited time trial that converts to a subscription after X amount of time?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Scott Belsky has responded with a similar/better explanation and some feedback:

“(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."

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Jun 06, 2024 Jun 06, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Jun 07, 2024 Jun 07, 2024

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

They should offer a version with no cloud features.  Old school, stand alone local version.

 

That clarification says "To be clear, Adobe requires a limited license to access content solely for the purpose of operating or improving the services and software and to enforce our terms and comply with law, such as to protect against abusive content." 

Which isn't clear at all to me since I don't know what operating or improving actually entails.  Could mean anything.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines