Adobe threatens users with lawsuit if they use old version of their products

[Al Brown]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Adobe Tells Users They Can Get Sued for Using Old Versions of Photoshop:

https://www.vice.com/en/article/a3xk3p/adobe-tells-users-they-can-get-sued-for-using-old-versions-of-photoshop

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Anbaric]

This is old news from 2019, but I think the key thing is 'you may be at risk of potential claims of infringement by third parties'. That sounds like Adobe covering themselves from these claims by officially  telling the users to stop using the old versions (perhaps they were in legal dispute with some company or other about 'intellectual property' included in these old versions). They don't really care about individual users being sued, which doesn't seem very likely to happen.

This story is also about old CC versions rather than 'perpetual' licence CS versions, so it really only affects subscribers who for some reason want to use a legacy version even though they are licensed to use the latest one. Of course there's a different issue with CS, which is that Adobe have killed the activation servers for all but the most recent versions. Whether some legal dispute like this was part of their motivation, or whether it's just the usual desire to push everyone on to the rental treadmill regardless of whether they'd spent thousands on 'perpetual' licences that are now worthless, is unclear.

[Tom R]

The problematic relationship between the users and purveyors of software impacts many creators who increasingly rely upon stable versions of these products in order to produce.

I still regret having to donate much of my darkroom to a local high-school when I retired because I realized that moving to a “hybrid” workflow would put me in the kinds of untenable situations described in the article quoted by the OP.

I mention “retirement” because I spent most of my life in CS, researching and creating various softwares—from previous generation AI to more mundane (fungible) applications. On the bright side, I never abandoned my film cameras and the attendant technologies—in large part because I didn’t trust the “software industry” to be anything more than … well, an industry. I am currently thinking of how to practically reconstitute a darkroom, or at least a space/workflow where I can regain some control/agency over this aspect of the photographic process.

Edited May 15, 2024 by Tom R

[pcgarner]

This affirms why I abandoned Adobe some years ago. And have not had a moment's regret. They offer nothing that DxO and other companies supply quite eloquently. 

[Pyrogallol]

Has Mr Adobe got a spy satellite that can see Photoshop 7 still running on Windows XP, not connected to the internet?

[frame-it]

from 2021 >

"Adobe is in the midst of a lawsuit with Dolby and has accused Adobe of copyright infringement and breach of contract, which could be the reason why past versions of Creative Cloud apps are now restricted," said MacRumors alluding to the ongoing litigation over Adobe's licensing agreement with Dolby (stemming from the initial move to CC from traditional media).  

[Aryel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I switched to affinity photo about one year ago. Very happy with it. 

[Ko.Fe.]

I never needed photoshop. I use old standalone Lightroom and will never get into subscription money trap. 

[dpitt]

For those that want to use free software and avoid subscriptions and licenses. I used Darktable and Rawtherapee for a while before I jumped on a discounted "perpetual" licensed version of C1P a year ago.

The quotes on perpetual mean that it is perpetual as long as you do not need the latest version. So basically, if you stay on the same MacOS or Windows after your free update period of one year has expired...

Darktable is very powerful but has a learning curve...Rawtherapee is more user friendly and has everything one needs really
Both have the typical unpolished interface, but they do work and are free to download and use.

I still use Darktable for special things neither LR or C1P can provide e.g. :
Put a watermark that is fully customized and  has EXIF info like shot date in it in each image that is exported through a special export script.

I looked for a way to do this in LR and C1P and AFAIK there is no way to put this kind of dynamic info in a watermark with any major software package, and Darktable has it out of the box. Typical...Darktable has multiple firsts to do almost anything. 🙂

[frame-it]

47 minutes ago, dpitt said:

Put a watermark that is fully customized and  has EXIF info like shot date in it in each image that is exported through a special export script.

 

I looked for a way to do this in LR and C1P and AFAIK there is no way to put this kind of dynamic info in a watermark with any major software

? in C1 you can use tokens to add some exif to the watermark >

Click on the adjacent (…) icon to open the Watermark Tokens Manager dialog box. Select a token or collection of tokens from the list displayed, from the Group or Presets drop-down menus, or add a combination of text and tokens, and select OK.

example from my C1 lib, fstop, shutter speed, iso, and focal length [GFX50r + Leica 135mm Elmar-M]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

[250swb]

As has been said the context is about old versions and tidying up copyright. But to follow the herd I’ll overreact and tear my clothes off and run around in circles screeching like a scared chicken about the evil fox called Adobe (not).

[Al Brown]

I see the message of the article (as stated in the intro) "how in the modern era, you increasingly don’t actually own the things you’ve spent your hard-earned money on".

John Deere has a digital lock on the software that runs their tractors using it to lock owners out from making repairs because it makes a tidy profit from forcing them into dealerships it controls and even using kill switches for the electric ones as we have seen - stolen tractors rendered inert by an over-the-air update. In the latter case it was actually good because the thieves who stole them from Ukraine lost, but imagine a car company digitally blocking your car if you do not pay a fine or if you do not prolong your drivers licence. A very probable future.
When you buy something, you should own it. Using older CC versions of PS is not about distributing pirated content or anything similar and should not be a prohibited activity. Adobe should not pass their corporate legal blunders on end users to cover their backs.

[dpitt]

8 hours ago, frame-it said:

? in C1 you can use tokens to add some exif to the watermark >

Click on the adjacent (…) icon to open the Watermark Tokens Manager dialog box. Select a token or collection of tokens from the list displayed, from the Group or Presets drop-down menus, or add a combination of text and tokens, and select OK.

example from my C1 lib, fstop, shutter speed, iso, and focal length [GFX50r + Leica 135mm Elmar-M]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

Thanks for pointing this out. I have not needed it since I have C1P and this would do what I need.
Another bonus for C1P!

I looked for a solution in LR almost 2 years ago and did not find one. All I could find were fully customized static watermarks, but without the possibility to enter tags from EXIF, like the date it was shot...

Now that I have C1P, I will definitely use this feature.

When I found the solution in Darktable, it was a bit more complex, but also more flexible than this. It allows you to incorporate any graphic and embed tags anywhere you want in that. 

 

[Jeff S]

Get over it or simply choose another software.

I like the Adobe products and subscribe for roughly the same amount I used to pay for the old model, and less than darkroom days.  As with other subscriptions, if I change my mind, I can unsubscribe.

Jeff

[jaapv]

This is over 5 years old. Has there been one lawsuit or even cease and desist letter over this? Not that I know of.  Three words come to mind: misinterpretation, storm and teacup. 

[Tom R]

22 hours ago, Aryel said:

I switched to affinity photo about one year ago. Very happy with it. 

I have used Affinity Photo (and Publisher) for several years and have been pretty satisfied with both products.

I understand that the company that provides Affinity has recently been purchased. If current trends are any indication, the new owners are not interested in quality software for a niche market, nor do they care about the “user’s sensibilities, etc.” No; they are interested in optimizing profits from this acquisition, and they will replace its licensing policy with the more profitable monthly subscription contracts, or as it is more appropriately called: “ransom ware.” And yes, I have read letters from the current staff about maintaining the same dedication to their user base, etc. What will most likely happen is that the new owners will “listen” carefully to what the existing staff say, and then use that information to determine which individuals are likely to cause problems (i.e., refuse to replace perpetual licenses with the eCommerce standards (another conversation)); and then they will replace the problematic team members with those who will tow the line.

[Anbaric]

11 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I like the Adobe products and subscribe for roughly the same amount I used to pay for the old model, and less than darkroom days.

This message was addressed to people who were already subscribing, but still using an older subscription version for whatever reason (maybe hardware compatibilty, or because they wanted a fixed interface or feature set). It's nothing to do with not liking the taste of the subscription Kool-Aid, and everything to do with Adobe covering their own ass, quite possibly in the Dolby lawsuit mentioned above. They could then say to the opposing lawyers that the old subscription versions that included the disputed technology were no longer offered or licensed, and that they'd told customers to stop using them.

[Anbaric]

43 minutes ago, Tom R said:

I have used Affinity Photo (and Publisher) for several years and have been pretty satisfied with both products.

I understand that the company that provides Affinity has recently been purchased. If current trends are any indication, the new owners are not interested in quality software for a niche market, nor do they care about the “user’s sensibilities, etc.” No; they are interested in optimizing profits from this acquisition, and they will replace its licensing policy with the more profitable monthly subscription contracts, or as it is more appropriately called: “ransom ware.” And yes, I have read letters from the current staff about maintaining the same dedication to their user base, etc. What will most likely happen is that the new owners will “listen” carefully to what the existing staff say, and then use that information to determine which individuals are likely to cause problems (i.e., refuse to replace perpetual licenses with the eCommerce standards (another conversation)); and then they will replace the problematic team members with those who will tow the line.

We'll see what happens, but this sort of thing rarely ends well in the long run. At least if you still have the Affinity v1 installers, which just need licence keys, you can never be prevented from putting the sofware on any system that remains compatible. In v2 they added mandatory online activation, which means that at some point they could pull the plug, as Adobe has already done with all but the most recent versions of CS.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[frame-it]

1 minute ago, Anbaric said:

never be prevented from putting the sofware on any system that remains compatible.

is the key point here if one is using a mac

 

[Al Brown]

It is not the point how old the article is. The point I wanted to convey is what I stated in post #12.