-
Adobe Creative Cloud Terms of Use
-
I’m genuinely interested in what TV stations or other large production companies think of the cloud. Will they be willing to build a system based on a rental model? Do they prefer this type of model? If so, PP should really pick up market share. If not, does that leave Avid as the winner?
JT
-
[Sandeep Sajeev] “These things are always pretty disturbing to read.
When I started out on my own a few years ago and signed my first production contract with JWT, I thought the Terms had been drawn up with the sole intention of screwing me over at any moment of their choosing.
I guess at some point you have to trust that if you keep your end of the bargain, the other party will keep theirs.
“
Almost all EULAs read like this. They are notorious for it. I mean, we can argue about EULA boilerplate in general and the over-reaching lawyers that put it together–I’ve always found that stuff amusing/vaguely frightening–but judging Adobe’s intentions by looking at it and ignoring what everybody else does seems a bit absurd.
-
Sure, I remember taking the contract over to my lawyer for perusal and he didn’t even blink.
It is what it is. Everyone’s looking to minimize risk.
-
[Craig Seeman] “e’ve also seen whether a company folds its cards or EOLs software, at some point the activation server shuts down. Thus you may not even be able to move the old software.”
And Adobe, to their credit, provided an activation free copy of CS2 when they did that, so there is hope.
-
[Sandeep Sajeev] “It is what it is. Everyone’s looking to minimize risk.”
Yes, plus there has to be reasonable expectation. I mean, Adobe could say, “We own all copyright to any work created with our software in perpetuity” in their agreement, but I highly doubt that would stand in court because it’s simply not reasonable.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Is there any pro level software that you pay for and use that has a terms of service that does not absolve the creating company from change?”
My concern is not about change, it’s about the explicit right to terminate service for life.
I don’t own any software – either professional or consumer – where the vendor has the right and the ability to cut off my access to my files. That’s the difference with Creative Cloud.
Here’s an example of the consequence from NBC News:
https://nbcnews.to/YxgoYVIt’s one thing when something like this happens with consumable media. It’s another thing entirely when it’s your life’s work and your ability to keep working.
It’s easy to write this example off as an outlier, but with over 10 million users worldwide (for Photoshop alone as of 4 years ago) being forced into the Cloud, problems like this are inevitable.
I do feel better knowing there’s backward compatibility with CS6. I’m very glad I own a perpetual license for it.
I agree with you and Craig that trust cannot be a factor. We’ve all learned that the hard way. That’s why I will continue to let Adobe know my feelings about the need for more flexible licensing options.
My point in raising this issue is also to flag the fact the we’re a minority here on the COW. Photography and design users far outnumber those of use who use CS tools in post. I’m trying to get a sense of of how this radical change is viewed outside our particular bubble and from all I can gather, it is not going over well at all.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “My concern is not about change, it’s about the explicit right to terminate service for life.”
Again, and I am just playing devil’s advocate, how can a company guarantee that they will be successful for your entire life?
[David Lawrence] “I don’t own any software – either professional or consumer – where the vendor has the right and the ability to cut off my access to my files. That’s the difference with Creative Cloud.”
I guess I see it as you don’t have access to open your (not Adobe’s) files on the computer(s) that you have lapsed payment + grace period on a CC license.
You can take your files with you to a valid station and use them, without penalty, and Adobe does not own your files.
I have software that I lease. When I don’t pay, the service is cut. It’s not that far of a jump, nor do I feel that my rights are violated.
I knew this going in, though. We are right here at the cross roads with Adobe. The red pill or the green pill or CS6 forever.
[David Lawrence] “My point in raising this issue is also to flag the fact the we’re a minority here on the COW. Photography and design users far outnumber those of use who use CS tools in post. I’m trying to get a sense of of how this radical change is viewed outside our particular bubble and from all I can gather, it is not going over well at all.”
Yes, $20/mo for new a version of Photoshop is a lot to ask and a big price difference in buying the occasional update.
—
A heavy design agency just left the edit suite.
They’re psyched about the Cloud.
*shrug*
Jeremy
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Again, and I am just playing devil’s advocate, how can a company guarantee that they will be successful for your entire life?”
They can’t. That’s exactly why I don’t want to depend on their activation servers for access to my files.
[Jeremy Garchow] “You can take your files with you to a valid station and use them, without penalty, and Adobe does not own your files. “
Right. I just don’t want to depend on Adobe for validation.
It’s really simple:
Current model –
I pay Adobe a big chunk of money all at once. Adobe provides software product I can use as long as I want without any further payment. 3, 5, 10 years, as long as my hardware runs it, it still works. My cost is fixed.
New model –
I pay Adobe a small chunk of money every month. Adobe provides software I can only use as long as I keep paying. If I stop paying, the software and access to my files goes poof. My cost is unlimited.
I understand why agencies might like this model. I notice that most advocates for the Cloud seem to be attached to agencies or facilities. If I was in that camp, I probably would feel different too. But speaking as a freelancer, Creative Cloud doesn’t make sense and is not a good value for me. From what I’m seeing online, there are many others like myself who agree. I still want to give Adobe my money. I would even pay a fair premium for perpetual use. There are lots of ways Adobe can create a win-win if they’re really listening.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “I understand why agencies might like this model. I notice that most advocates for the Cloud seem to be attached to agencies or facilities.”
David,
I think there may be a real divide on reaction to this.
As I’ve stated before, I suspect for agencies and facilities the CC model will actually work out to reduced cost.
For independents, educational, and arts users the CC model is, I suspect, an announcement of increased cost.
Further – because in spite of Jeremy’s narrow view this is not only about money – those two groups have a different relationship to the work they do.
For agencies and facilities, the work only exists as a means to economic viability. Tools can be assessed purely in light of ROI.
Educators, independents, and artists tend to have a very different relationship to their work and its future. They’ll assess tools differently in light of those values.
Franz.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Further – because in spite of Jeremy’s narrow view this is not only about money – those two groups have a different relationship to the work they do.”
That saying “it’s not about the money, but its about the money” is what a mentor of mine says a lot.
It can translate differently for different situations, and body language has alot to do with the delivery of the message so it might not read well on a web page.
As a complete coincidence, check out the first question to Adobe’s CEO:
https://mashable.com/2013/05/06/adobe-ceo-interview-creative-cloud/
I will ask for clarification, though, before responding.
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Educators, independents, and artists tend to have a very different relationship to their work and its future. They’ll assess tools differently in light of those values.”
So if its not about the cost of the tool for educators, independents, and artists, what is it about?
By the way, as far as I can tell, educators are getting the rawest deal I’ve heard so far, but I’ve also heard conflicting reports.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up