Last night Adobe released a free, web-based photo editor called Photoshop Express (which despite it’s name really isn’t anything like Photoshop). I tried it out, it’s not a bad online editor, but based on a tip from someone else today I decided to look at their Terms of Service:
8. Use of Your Content.
1. 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, 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 (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.
Whoa. What that means is that if you use their service and put any of your photos into a public gallery, you’ve given Adobe a no-restrictions license to do anything they want with your photos.
Not cool, Adobe. Not cool at all.
update 3/27 21:13 – see comments
Josh Bancroft
27 Mar 2008That’s the same license YouTube uses, the same rights they claim, and the reason that I put my videos on blip.tv, where I retain full control, and don’t have to agree to such egregious terms. It’s also why I put my photos on Flickr, and looks like I’ll be continuing to do so for the foreseeable future.
Aaron
27 Mar 2008Adobe has apparently acknowledged there’s a problem and their legal department is looking into it. I hope we hear some positive news soon on this issue.
Spike
28 Mar 2008This is not the same as Youtube’s TOS at all. Youtube’s are fairly standard, and allow them to use the uploaded content within the context of youtube’s business, including promotion. It does not include re-selling rights, and it does not include a license in perpetuity. Please read the two documents carefully rather than on the surface, the differences are obvious.
Pingback: Revised Photoshop Express Terms: Better, But Still Disconcerting » Hockley Photography
nad33m.com
11 Dec 2008not good, but its still a free easy way to edit images. Cheaper than the $400 for the CS version at least. Maybe Adobe would pay you a fee if the decide to use any of your creations.