Adobe recently updated its terms of use, and although companies do this all the time, these new changes have sparked a significant amount of discord and discussion among users.

The updated terms of use give Adobe access to any form of media uploaded to its Creative Cloud and Document Cloud services, a change which immediately sparked a privacy backlash and led to many users calling for a boycott. So annoyed were paying customers that Adobe was forced to issue a statement clarifying what the updated terms mean, and what they cover.

The changes Adobe made include switching the wording from “we will only access, view or listen to your content in limited ways” to “we may access, view or listen to your content” and the addition of “through both automated and manual methods”. In the Content section, Adobe made changes to how it would scan user data, adding the manual mention.

In its explanation of the terms changes, Adobe said, “To be clear, Adobe requires a limited license to access content solely for the purpose of operating or improving the services and software and to enforce our terms and comply with law, such as to protect against abusive content.”

While the intentions behind these changes might be to enhance service quality and ensure compliance with legal standards, permitting the company to have such broad access to personal and potentially sensitive content clearly feels intrusive to many users. The shift from an explicit limitation to a more open-ended permission for content access could be seen as a step backward in terms of user control and data protection and raises concerns about privacy and user trust, which Adobe’s statement doesn’t fully address.

  • 555@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Define illegal content. Rainbow flags in Russia or the Middle East?

    • WallEx@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      A picture of a man in front of tanks in China … Some fictional bear …

      • 555@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I hear Winnie the Pooh is pretty controversial some places.

        • essell@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Well, if he’s going to walk about all the time without trousers, what does he expect?

    • irotsoma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes, this is exactly what it’s for, as well as Winnie the Pooh in China, LGBTQ+ materials in Florida, or any other ridiculous laws. As fascism is taking over many countries, including the US, UK, and other Western countries, they are pressuring content storing companies to add backdoors to allow hunting down dissidents.

      Oh, and also this is a way to allow selling the content to train AI since it’s less obvious that it is allowed with this kind of vague wording.

      • 555@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        No doubt it’s about training AI on design. All these designers are putting themselves out of business. Nothing to be done about it. Corporations always win.