Last week I discussed the Adobe Photoshop Express terms of use (ToU) and how the wording was nothing short of a rights grab (see Adobe Photoshop Express & The Mindless Photo Rights Grab). By weeks end John Nack posted an update, regarding the ToU, that “the Photoshop Express team has made some changes”.
Reading the paraphrased revisions on John’s blog post alleviated what concerns I had, but when I read the revised ToU I was left scratching my head wondering what the hell I just read.
First John’s post linked to the General ToU which I think has edits, but they’re not marked so I can’t be sure what they are. Text as seen at the top of the General ToU:
Last Updated on April 3, 2008.
Changes are not marked in red. Please read entire document. Please also note that these revised Terms will apply to all of Your Content as of the Effective Date.
If you do not agree with these revised Terms, please remove Your Content from the Service by the Effective Date.
What people need to certainly reread is the Adobe Photoshop Express Additional Terms of Use which has (2) two edits. On this page I get the edit about advertisements in Section 10, but I’m left confused by the most important edit to Section 8.
8. Use of Your Content.
- 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, and unless otherwise specifically agreed in any Additional Terms that might accompany individual services (such as Photoshop.com/Express), you grant Adobe a worldwide, royalty-free, nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, 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.
I’ve reread this at least ten times and each time and the edit in red makes about as much sense as when I read it the first time. Didn’t I just read this in the “Additional Terms of Use”? Why is the Additional ToU referring to the Additional ToU? Is this not circular loop? I still don’t see how this matches up to the paraphrased note from the Photoshop Express team as noted on John Nack’s blog.
- Adobe’s Rights – Adobe has retained only those limited rights that allow us to operate the service and to enable you to do all the things the service offers. If you decide to terminate your Photoshop Express account, Adobe’s rights also will be terminated. We don’t claim ownership of your content and won’t sell your images.
- Shared Content – We clearly state the rights you’re granting other users when you choose to publicly share Your Content.
Although the edit in red still confuses the hell out of me one element of my confusion was addressed, but only after some detective work. What isn’t in the edited license is (6) striked out words that were in the previous version of the ToU “derive revenue or other remuneration from”. Previously in the context of…
…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…
With these words out of the ToU I can see how the claims in John Nack’s post “We don’t claim ownership of your content and won’t sell your images.” are valid.
Perhaps this all makes sense to a lawyer, but the edit to the ToU was hardly an easy thing to figure out and to be honest I’m still not 100% on what the edit now means. At least the “distribute, derive revenue or other remuneration from” text has been removed.
Once again this goes to show…
1. Terms of Use are hardly readable to the common user.
2. The photo community rallying for their rights can instigate change.
Now if only Adobe could make these edits a little more clear so they’re as easy to understand as the paraphrased text in John Nack’s blog post.
[tags]Adobe, Photoshop Express, rights, copyright, software, technology, web, terms of use, rights grab, edit, revise, John Nack[/tags]
Jim, I think the new wording is A LOT less problematic than the old one. I understand your confusion re. the “additional terms”, which seems to come from the fact that users might first view the General Terms, and THEN the specific terms for a product (which could then be seen as “additional”), -or- they may first see the SPECIFIC terms for a product and THEN the general terms (which are also “additional” but from a different angle).
I see that Adobe’s legal team put in some effort to change the critical sections. Further, they put the critical wording on the use of your content to the relevant terms (the specific terms). This way the licence you grant to Adobe is no longer “hidden” in the general terms.
All this looks fine to me.
Now, the interesting question is – I see no wording that would allow Adobe to make money from the public display of your images. That would also mean “no ads”. How are they supposed to generate money?
I explain the changes to the TOS on my blog
http://www.garyrgilbert.com/blog/index.cfm/2008/4/6/Adobe-Updates-Terms-for-Elements-Express
I for one find the new TOS a lot simpler to understand.
@Mark Zanzig Adobe does have wording in the ToU that covers their ability to pursue income from ads on pages where content is displayed.
See 10. Right to Derive Revenue/Advertisements.
here: Adobe Photoshop Express Additional Terms of Use
Adobe already lost me on their first T&C version. I no longer have a desire to try this product as a result.