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.

[ace_cleg]

If they were, they would have done it. Adobe are hoping we will forget about it, what they don't realise is we are actively looking for ways around using Adobe products. What I can't understand is Adobe Acrobat reader is used as the secure document app that nearly all lawyers and other professional bodies use in the UK. Adobe legally cannot look at this information, this means Adobe products should be banned from the UK and another country that have tight data laws! Example I have a child abuse case and I'm using Acrobat as my secure documentation app, Adobe CANNOT look at this. It would be highly illegal!!!

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@ace_cleg you really need to read the specific Acrobat terms and what they are covering before you post incorrect information like this.

[Donka]

Kevin, I don't get it why you try to defend Adobes terrible TOA.

And you are posting incorrect information regarding the content of the TOA, you are definitely not better.

We are discussing what possibilities it gives adobe, and you are here stating "trust me bro" we will not.

I rather not trust you and instead have a reasonable TOA.

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@Donka having dealt with these TOS since 2013 both from Adobe and a business/customer standpoint I'd love to hear where you think I am posting incorrect information regarding the intent of this. I'm not defending the confusing language or how this was handled with forcing users to read the TOS.

You can read any TOS and conjure hypotheticals til the end of time, reality however says different.

The specific terms regarding cloud asset access have been there since Creative Cloud launched in 2013. The rewording brought this to the forefront and users are confusing the legal intent.

It has nothing to do with Firefly/Generative AI ML models/training resources or accessing an individual users' file on their local machine.

All of this will be explained in the upcoming Adobe post from Scott Belsky.

[ace_cleg]

Adobe sued by US, Government due to bad practices. Europe next ... Stealing client data, didn't you learn from whatsapp! I have now downloads Affinity and stopped paying my monthly subscription. Its also illegal to charge me per month in the UK if I'm not using the product. I haven't used it since this all started, thanks affinity for halfing your yearly prices to help us creatives!

[Kevin Stohlmeyer · Accepted solution]

Adobe has posted updated Terms with explainers:

https://www.adobe.com/legal/terms.html

and responses from an interview with Scott Belsky:

https://petapixel.com/2024/06/18/adobes-terms-of-use-controversy-provided-an-opportunity-to-improve/

[Bjørn Edvard]

It's still a total, complete and unabridged sh*tshow though: "Adobe’s new Terms of Use include new gray sections, which contextualize individual sections of the Terms of Use. It is worth noting that these new “plain language” sections are not part of the legally binding Terms of Use agreement itself." Adobe needs to find a way to fit those "clarifications" into legally binding text that actually goes into the TOU. As is, they could legally do whatever they want and still be in the clear, regardless of "intent", which isn't impressing anyone (except you, apparently). Make it legal, make it binding, anything else is just white noise.

[dbeattie-rcb]

Absolutely! It's meaningless until a revised TOS agreement (which addresses all the concerns!) pops up on our screens to review.

[ace_cleg]

I've been using Adobe since 1996, I have for the first time refused to pay my subscription and cancelled my account. Any company that feels it can lose loyal customers who have stuck with Adobe through think and thin! Did I agree with buying Macromedia and destroying the competition, NO! Did I like moving to I don't own the software I pay for and only rent it NO! But you had to push us that final time! So now reap what you sow! I'm now on Affinity and if I need to use AI I have a Dalle account with ChatGPT, I've now removed a big cost over a year! So thanks Adobe for opening my eyes! U know if my clients new this stuff, first part of the contract agreement would be, " DON'T use Adobe on any of the work you are providing!!!".

[Bjørn Edvard]

Same-ish. I started out with Photoshop 4 (the first with layers) and Illustrator 7. Back then QuarkXPress was king of DTP,  completely outperforming PageMaker. 

[ace_cleg]

O the goods days until Government allowed digital companies to become monopolies and have profit bigger that countries GDP! Me, these corporation really think AI is their path to making more money, WRONG! I'm completely a project at the moment, 3 people, AI, GreenTech, how we doing it AI! With web 3, blockchain, AI, we're moving back into a situation where small agile companies can out perform larger organisation. Watch them disappear!! What they are doing to us, is same as they are and have done to the gaming industry. But don't worry these guys will open small agencies and produce games that actually work! Speech over lol:)

[ace_cleg]

Sorry I'm heavily dyslexic! Please forgive my spelling:)

[Bjørn Edvard]

No worries. I'm not grading your grammar and/or spelling. I remember being pretty p*ssed too, when they were allowed to buy out Macromedia. The decision to sunset the brilliant Freehand in favor of the lackluster Illustrator perfectly illustrates how deeply incompetent the decision makers at Adobe has been since before the turn of the millennium. You could hold those two up for comparison with each other even today, and Freehand would still come out on top, decades later. They just keep peddling that ancient, crusty code, charging the white out of your eyes.

[Monika Gause]

The decision to sunset the brilliant Freehand

By @Bjørn Edvard

That decision was made at Macromedia before it was acquired by Adobe: https://losingfight.com/blog/2007/05/17/rip-freehand/ 

[Bjørn Edvard]

I stand corrected, Monika, but still, Adobe could and should have saved this excellent piece of software once they had their greedy little claws in it. 😉👍

[Monika Gause]

I stand corrected, Monika, but still, Adobe could and should have saved this excellent piece of software once they had their greedy little claws in it. 😉👍

By @Bjørn Edvard

I suppose you tone down your language a bit. What you might not know is that Altsys had developed FreeHand in their own programming language: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37045471

You might remember the speed in which operating systems changed during the last 20 years. Good luck with not using the standard stuff. Because then you need to first update your programming language and then the application itself. Sound like a lot of work? Yeah ...

[Bjørn Edvard]

"I suppose you tone down your language a bit."

I see no reason to tone down anything. The fact that this thread is even marked as "solved" is an insult to us all, as it's evidently not, by a long shot.

[ace_cleg]

Muddying the waters, distraction tactics. Lets just get the facts right Adobe has F**ked up and is trying to back peddle while still trying to steal peoples creative work. Its like a gallery saying, yeh you can show ya work, but we own the copywrite to reproduce it whenever we want in the future ...

[michael38095599lt9z]

I've noticed that when ever I talk about this topic on any other discussion page I get locked out of it and I'm no longer allowed to post on it. The terms and service of adobe is deceptive and misleading.

my original post: 

Honest anyone defending this obviously works for them or has shares, i read the terms and conditions. yes you can opt out but is very easy to fall into the trap. if you don't read the TC. they own your work. Thats not OK that is wrong and this should be changed SIMPLE. since I'm required to slightly change this reponce here is the update. you are misleading people so they don't look too deep into the TC. adobe is looking to take peoples IP by misleading TC for example subscriptions, AI credits,  uploading to the cloud or even using fatures they push without clearly stating what will happen if you use it. this shouldn't be the case this is wrong and you are misleading people whos work is everything to them. espesically privacy."

I high lighted that even if you opt out the cloud service they design their app to default to upload your work leading to them taking ownership of anything on their cloud. 

I also noticed their so called expert immediately respond with lies or complete nonsense and for some reason are tagged with the correct answers. And if one is failing more come to the rescue. I'm already paying monthly for an app I'll never get to keep now the work I put my all into is now getting stolen from me and I'm ment to just sit there and say nothing.... yeah we need to talk about this.

I included screenshots of the discussions that were open for anyone to participate but all of a sudden when real people started making some real points it time to shut it down.

[Ciccillotto]

It was talked about in this post

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-discussions/adobe-now-requires-the-right-to-acces...

[michael38095599lt9z]

Please stop lying to people, I wasn't mad till i read the TC. don't send me to some fake article they paid for. their own TC says it. fudging the words and spreading misinformation too people is very dishonest and you need to stop. 

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

@michael38095599lt9z please review the forum guidelines before making accusations.

You are entitled to your own opinions but don't accuse people of lying just because you are misinformed/misunderstand the terms.

https://community.adobe.com/t5/using-the-community-discussions/adobe-community-guidelines/td-p/47881...

[John T Smith]

Thanks for sharing your concerns and feedback with everyone. For clarification on Terms of Use updates, please see Adobe's latest blog: https://adobe.ly/TermsOfUseUpdate

[000egg000]

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.

[D Fosse]

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.