Adobe, the software giant behind the popular Creative Cloud Suite, has recently come under fire for its updated Terms of Use (ToS). The language in the ToS sparked controversy among users, leading to vocal backlash on social media platforms. The updated ToS includes several modifications, such as clarifying that Adobe may access users’ content through automated and manual methods, deleting content from inactive accounts, and shortening the period to resolve disputes informally. However, it is Section 2.2 of the ToS that has caused the most uproar.
Section 2.2 states that Adobe may access, view, or listen to users’ content in limited ways, using techniques such as machine learning. This has raised concerns among users about potential surveillance and the training of AI models on their confidential and copyrighted content. Many users feel that this infringes upon their privacy rights and violates non-disclosure agreements and confidentiality clauses with clients.
The backlash against Adobe’s updated ToS has been significant, with even Hollywood director Duncan Jones criticizing the company. Users have taken to social media to express their concerns, sharing screenshots and annotated comparisons of the language changes between the previous ToS and the current one. However, it is important to note that Section 4.1 of the ToS clarifies that Adobe does not review all uploaded content but uses available technologies and processes to screen for illegal or abusive content.
In response to the backlash, Adobe has issued a statement emphasizing that this policy has been in place for many years and that the company added clarifying examples earlier this year to be more transparent with its customers. Adobe accesses user content for various reasons, such as delivering innovative cloud-based features and taking action against prohibited content. The company also clarified that it does not access content stored locally on users’ devices.
Sources close to Adobe have further emphasized that the analysis of content uploaded to Creative Cloud or worked on in networked Adobe apps primarily aims to offer new Gen AI features and does not extend to locally saved Adobe file formats. Additionally, Adobe has previously trained its AI features on content uploaded by contributors to Adobe Stock, which the company deems lawful and ethical according to its own ToS for that service.
Despite these explanations, many users remain dissatisfied with the ambiguity of the ToS and the increasing presence of generative AI content on the internet. Some users have expressed their intention to cancel their Adobe subscriptions as a result. It remains to be seen whether this backlash will have a substantial impact on Adobe’s business.
