Photoshop ToS grants Adobe access to user projects for 'content moderation'

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Adobe’s updated Photoshop terms of service, which grant the company broad rights to access user content for “content moderation” and potentially AI training, are raising alarms over privacy, intellectual property, and the risks of cloud‑tied creative tools. Commenters debate whether the language is standard legal boilerplate or an overreach that could conflict with NDAs and professional workflows, noting Adobe’s subsequent attempt to clarify its intent. Many see this as a tipping point to abandon Creative Cloud in favor of alternatives like Affinity, Krita, Pixelmator, DaVinci Resolve, and Photopea, or to prioritize open-source and perpetual-license software to avoid similar lock‑ins.

Scope of Adobe’s Access & ToS Interpretation

  • New ToS language is seen as granting Adobe broad rights to access user projects for moderation, AI training, and marketing.
  • Some argue it applies only to assets intentionally stored/processed in Adobe’s cloud (e.g., Behance).
  • Others read it as covering any content created with Adobe tools, regardless of storage location.
  • One commenter notes this breadth could clash with NDAs and enterprise compliance, though another guesses NDA‑bound work may not be affected (unclear).
  • Adobe’s own follow-up blog post and ToS diff are linked; one commenter notes the controversial wording pre‑dated the update.

Cloud Features & Data Flow

  • Many features implicitly send content to Adobe: generative AI, cloud rendering, form hosting, review tools, device sync, and security/counterfeiting checks.
  • The terms use broad “Services and Software” wording without clearly separating online vs offline processing, which fuels concern.

Subscription Model, Trust, and “Enshitification”

  • Strong resentment toward Adobe’s shift from perpetual licenses (e.g., CS6) to subscriptions and cloud tie‑in.
  • Some note Adobe products have improved substantially, saving time and “worth the price”; others feel feature development plateaued and releases are driven by marketing.
  • Several describe abandoning major upgrades or freezing systems to keep working setups intact.

Alternatives to Adobe

  • Popular image/graphics alternatives: Affinity suite, Pixelmator Pro, Krita, GIMP, Photopea.
  • Video/motion alternatives: DaVinci Resolve with Fusion, Corel VideoStudio, Kdenlive.
  • Photo workflow: DxO PhotoLab, Capture One (with caveats about licensing), Skylum/Neo, Photo Mechanic, FastRawViewer.
  • PDF editing/annotation: PDF Expert (Mac), Qoppa tools, Master PDF Editor, Xournal++ / XournalPP, LibreOffice.
  • Some worry about startups getting acquired and “enshittified”; preference for open source or source‑available tools because they can’t be taken away as easily.

Piracy, Security, and Morality

  • Several claim it is morally justified to pirate Adobe given perceived spying, lock‑in, and pricing.
  • Others strongly disagree, arguing piracy reinforces Adobe’s dominance and starves alternatives.
  • Debate over safety: some trust long‑running “reputable” cracked versions; others warn of hidden malware and botnets.
  • A recurring sentiment: paid, DRM‑heavy software can feel more hostile and invasive than pirated copies.

Broader Reflections

  • Frustration with vague, catch‑all legal language, especially around AI training and data sharing.
  • Calls for more explicit, B2B‑style disclosure of subprocessors and exact data uses in consumer software.