Adobe faces a backlash over its terms of service that say Adobe may access user content via “automated and manual methods” to improve its services and software

Adobe has been one of the leading legacy enterprise software companies to embrace generative AI and make it accessible …

VentureBeat 2024-06-07 Carl Franzen

Context & Ripple Effects

Adobe’s push to put generative AI into Creative Cloud had already been framed as cautious amid creator skepticism, while its business rollout emphasized indemnification for Firefly-generated work. The disputed terms make the provenance and handling of customers’ underlying files—not only AI output—a central trust issue.

The backlash follows earlier user concerns over training on customer projects. Adobe’s subsequent clarification that Firefly is not trained on customer content addresses that specific fear, but also highlights how broadly written access terms can collide with creators’ expectations of control.

First-order effects

Creative Cloud customers, especially those working with sensitive or unreleased material, face immediate uncertainty over when Adobe may review their content and for what service-improvement purposes.
Adobe must defend the scope and communication of its terms while preserving confidence in its generative-AI features and broader Creative Cloud relationship.

Second-order effects

Competitors can position more restrictive content-access and training commitments as a differentiator for professional creators and enterprise teams.
The episode raises the value of clearer separation between content used to operate a service and content used to develop AI, reinforcing demand for explicit governance language.

Third-order effects

If repeated across creative-software providers, consent and data-use controls could become a durable product and procurement requirement rather than legal boilerplate.
The broader AI market may increasingly be shaped by whether vendors can build governed content pipelines without undermining users’ ownership expectations.

The trend: Generative-AI adoption in creator software is turning content governance—access, training use, and ownership assurances—into a core competitive trust layer.

Discussion

@andrewwerth.bsky.social Andrew Werth on bluesky
This plus Windows soon capturing everything you do so you can search it (perhaps the worst feature ever devised in the history of bad features) makes me think, once again, that it's time to try switching to Linux.
@samsantala Sam Santala on x
So am I reading this, right? @Adobe @Photoshop I can't use Photoshop unless I'm okay with you having full access to anything I create with it, INCLUDING NDA work? [image]
@stretchedwiener @stretchedwiener on x
Here it is. If you are a professional, if you are under NDA with your clients, if you are a creative, a lawyer, a doctor or anyone who works with proprietary files - it is time to cancel Adobe, delete all the apps and programs. Adobe can not be trusted. [image]
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
Sam - while the team addresses your legal question, I can clearly state that Adobe does NOT train any GenAI models on customer's content, and we obviously have tight security around any form of access to customer's content. As a company that stores cloud documents and assets for…
@that_guymike @that_guymike on x
Very cool thing to read when launching Substance Painter today [image]
@christsirgiotis Chris Tsirgiotis on x
So ⁦@Adobe⁩ can track how you use their products on your computer? WTF? [image]
@editortargett Ed Targett on x
How #Adobe's 2023 and 2024 terms of use compare fwiw. Pink is the new stuff. [image]
@tadcarpenter Tad Carpenter on x
Imagine having a bakery and after each customer purchase you then kicked them in the ass and stole their wallet on the way out.—Interesting way to support the artist who use and back your business, Adobe. [image]
@jessicahische Jessica Hische on x
“I wonder what's happening on Twitter? I haven't been on in a while. Oh what's this chatter about Adobe? Oh cool cool ” [image]
@samsantala Sam Santala on x
Realising I also need to agree to the terms if I want to sign in and cancel my subscription [image]
@webdevlaw Heather Burns on x
I say this as half a joke, half not : at some point you'll be better off using a 15 year old laptop with 15 year old software, not connected to the internet, not updated, and not snitching on you to 1200 adtech partners via legitimate interest while scanning your content with AI.
@laurenwalshart @laurenwalshart on x
So let me get this straight @adobe you want full access to files created in your industry standard program that is mostly used by professionals and said work is likely under some form of NDA and no one thought “hey maybe that's an issue”?
@grummz @grummz on x
The Adobe controversy gets even worse. Adobe says they OWN WHAT YOU MAKE. It's not just privacy issue. If you use Adobe software to create works, Adobe claims to have a license to everything you make to use as they see fit. They can even sell it to someone else if they wish. [ima…
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@That_GuyMike first of all, this 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 Phot…
@tonroosendaal Ton Roosendaal on x
Adobe Creative Cloud uses your work to train AI. You already pay them to use your tools, and in future they will charge you for using your own work. Freedom to Create: Blender, Gimp, Krita, Inkscape.
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@AdamSinger @jessicahische truth and product should review too. welcome to my thursday morning ironically, these are the standard TOS of any major company in the cloud these days, and the changes made were largely immaterial compared to the set launched 11 years ago when it comes…
@grummz @grummz on x
Summary of rights Adobe @Adobe is asserting over YOUR work: - They can review it for Content Moderation - They can manually review it (humans) - They can publish or give it away for free - They can sell it to 3rd parties (sublicense) - They can and will use it to train their AI
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@Grummz this 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; some context if helpful - https://x.com/...
@adamsinger Adam Singer on x
@scottbelsky @jessicahische We have come full circle in that marketing should actually review legal stuff now too
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@Grummz @Adobe (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 thing…
@grummz @grummz on x
So the Adobe thing is really bad. Bad for Indie game devs, bad for all games devs. It's also really bad for photographers and content creators who use Premier to edit their videos They can spy on your art, review it, sell it or sublicense it for use by others. They can promote [i…
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@MJLCreative “solely for the purpose of operating...” for clarity: any modern software company that has features like reproducing as thumbnails, enabling users to share for review and approval via web link, auto generating variations, indexing for search etc - requires a license …
@avideomakr D.L. Watson on x
@scottbelsky @80Level The wording should explicitly detail the use cases for the licensed materials, not leave it open to interpretation with enough legal gray area for abuse.
@palomamcclain Paloma McClain on x
Even if what Scott is saying is true, it's clear that Adobe has sown so much distrust with creatives through their decisions regarding genAI that everything they do moving forward is viewed through an extra critical lense. It's a clear failure of the company.
@80level @80level on x
Adobe finds itself under fire for its recent spyware-esque Terms of Service update, which forces Photoshop and Substance 3D users to provide the company unlimited access to their projects. And that's only the tip of the iceberg: https://80.lv/... #adobe #photoshop [image]
@rahll Reid Southen on x
@scottbelsky ... The word “probably” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, Scott. Being high up at Adobe, you shouldn't be responding to concerns with “probably”, you should have definitive answers. Adobe loves to keep shitting the bed.
@mpecsinc Philip Elder on x
@SamSantala ... We keep our content on-premises within our collaborative environment when it comes to Adobe apps and others. So, if they're going to do this then they're sending content _out_ of our systems. Since when did software companies become law enforcement companies? Did …
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
social media teaches you to avoid people too emoldened by bias and anger. at some point, anger marginalizes reasoning and makes people increasingly indiscriminate about who and what they are angry at.
@robdjuk Rob Jones on x
@SamSantala ... Jasc Paint Shop Pro used to be great software back in the day.
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@JussiKemppainen ... no, Firefly GenAI tools are only trained on licensed / Adobe Stock content and NOT (and have never been) trained on customer content. this is very different than others in market and was a very deliberate decision - so I wanted to correct that assumption.
@ghoulmommie @ghoulmommie on x
@SamSantala ... I feel like using machine learning for “content moderation” is a sneaky way of saying “were installing spyware to train machine learning off everything you do”
r/technews r on reddit
Change to Adobe terms & conditions outrages many professionals
r/technology r on reddit
Change to Adobe terms & conditions outrages many professionals - 9to5Mac
r/LinusTechTips r on reddit
Photoshop Terms of Service grants Adobe access to user projects for ‘content moderation’
r/WeddingPhotography r on reddit
Photoshop Terms of Service grants Adobe access to user projects for ‘content moderation’
r/photography r on reddit
Photoshop Terms of Service grants Adobe access to user projects for ‘content moderation’
r/StallmanWasRight r on reddit
Photoshop's new terms of service require users to grant Adobe access to their active projects for “content moderation” and other purposes.
@adobe @adobe on x
We recently made an update to our Terms of Use with the goal of providing more clarity on a few specific areas. We have received a number of questions resulting from this update and want to provide some clarity.
@mesh Mike Chambers on x
Adobe just made a blog post with more information about the recent TOS update. This includes what actually changed (not much), as well as clearer statements on what Adobe can and cannot do with your content. https://blog.adobe.com/...
@adobe @adobe on x
Adobe will never assume ownership of a customer's work. Adobe hosts content to enable customers to use our applications and services. Customers own their content and Adobe does not assume any ownership of customer work.
@scottbelsky Scott Belsky on x
@virus69 @Adobe we've clarified the need for a limited license “solely for the purpose of operating...” that has been there for over ~11 years - like any other company that needs to host content in cloud on behalf of users and make thumbnails and sharing links etc: https://blog.a…

Chronicles