We have received a lot of inquiries about a recent update to our Terms of Use, which has sparked a discussion in our community about our overall Terms of Use and how they affect creators and the content they create with us. We are taking this moment to listen and internalize that feedback and appreciate our community for voicing their concerns and asking important questions. Our Chief Strategy Officer, Scott Belsky, and I share more about where we are in the process here. My personal takeaway is that as technology evolves, our legal terms will need to evolve to reflect the changing world around us and be clearer, more precise, and use easier-to-understand language to help ensure everyone understands what we do and how we do it.
Providing a reasonable explanation for every clause that might be seen as unfavorable to the user will help a lot. This is especially important because users often feel they don’t have a say in how the terms are written and feel it’s a ‘take it or leave it’ situation. There are already many terms of use which also contain a plain English explanatory visual guide to ensure everyone, regardless of background, understands the terms. Implementing something like this will help a lot.
adoby is CEO’s are the problem, nice move for throwing the legal team under the bus and pushing your agenda in your post,.. when they know what you shouldn’t do and you force them to write it any way. adoby company is getting eaten by the competition.. If they at least would truly care about their customers instead they want to switch their customers base so they can serve more with ai… but people who are creative and who would use ai are already their costumer. The icing on the top is learning from their creatives and trying to replace them.. so why would someone pay to be replaced? If you are creative get CapCut, Davinci resolve etc. they all run smoother.. and are free and have more features… even the paid versions are more capable.
Best to lead than to follow or ignore. Glad we are being transparent and caring of our customers in a way that shows leadership in the AI space. The creators seem to be cautiously optimistic about the adjustment to better language and recognition of the perceived negative components of the agreement. https://stocks.apple.com/ABHIP0aH2TnmGj_FYRk_mVQ
Is that why the US Federal Government is suing Adobe? I mean, what do you need to internalize? Adobe and their lawyers were 100% certain of what they were doing when they selected the wording and terminology, that much is obvious. It would be insulting to your customers to say otherwise. So, on a related note that is close to this matter: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/doj-ftc-adobe-photoshop-lawsuit-b2564294.html
If there's one benefit from AI it's clearer, more precise, and easier to understand legal terms.
Real leadership from you and team on this important issue Dana!
To be honest, the news of this update has shaken all the creatives in my circle. In this time where our creative IP and actual livelihoods are viewed as data to be mined, Adobe still has an opportunity to stand with the creative community.