Apologize if this has been posted...I searched but didn't find anything.
Saw this in the CNET review of the Photoshop Express Beta and wanted to get some thoughts on it. I signed up for the photoshop express Beta and it actually looks like it has some potential usage, certainly not for the professional, however.
But by signing up, I granted Abode an extremely broad use of any images i upload, apparently. From the General TOS:
Adobe does not claim ownership of Your Content. However, with respect to Your Content that you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Services, you grant Adobe a worldwide, royalty-free, nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, derive revenue or other remuneration from, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other Materials or works in any format or medium now known or later developed.
Now, the part about a "worldwide, royalty-free, nonexclusive, perpetual and irrevocable" license is just insane to me. I am an attorney and I know that they must have some super-aggressive lawyers who just inserted the most expansive licensing terms possible into the TOS, but this is ludicrous to me. The fact that they are claiming the license is irrevocable may not even be enforceable, actually.
Well i guess you don't want to upload anything to their site, work on the image and get it out of there, 2gb isn't much anyway. Somehow their verification hasn't worked for me so I haven't spent any time there. I work in medical photography and some folks can't even get their facilities to spring for PS Elements, was thinking of this as a solution, guess not.
true, 2 gigs isn't much, but it's also a beta and likely will later be better integrated with more powerful products. while it never would be a critical editing tool, it would be useful for less serious uses, such as quick edits of family photos to get prints when you are not near your own workstation.
However, i find Adobe's reach for such expansive licensing rights in a TOS that people typically blow right past to be extremely distasteful. I posted a thread on the adobe user forum and will send an email to their customer care department as a long time adobe consumer and shareholder.
Nice. Makes a (IMHO) silly concept move to distasteful. Thanks but no thanks, I'll stick with my outdated CS copy. Want a freebie PS? Use GIMP + the PS lookalike UI.
"“Publicly accessible” areas of the Services are those areas of the Adobe network of properties that are intended by Adobe to be available to the general public. However, publicly accessible areas of the Services do not include Services intended for private communication or areas off the Adobe network of properties such as portions of World Wide Web sites that are accessible via hypertext or other links but are not hosted or served by Adobe."
If you post in a public area, you are giving away your rights.
This is not stating that your stored images are property of Adobe.
Dpreview has and intro article on PS Express with note from Adobe basicly saying they didn't mean to say what the TOS says and their lawyers are looking into it. Guess there were a lot of complaints. That is also what Beta testing is for.
One reason for Adobe to insert this language is to attempt to close the loophole where some smart person will attempt to claim their image(s) contribute to the overall marketing of Adobe Photoshop and related products by its appearance on the www.photoshop.com website. Such claims usually attempt to demand part of revenue Adobe may derive from the "Photoshop" name from the date the image(s) appear on the Photoshop site.
This is probably worth more to Adobe than selling the images to some stock agency or magazines.
