Adobe Tells Users They Can Get Sued for Using Discontinued Versions

If you are using older versions of adobe creative suite, might want to take a look at this article:

"We have recently discontinued certain older versions of Creative Cloud applications and and a result, under the terms of our agreement, you are no longer licensed to use them,” Adobe said in the email. “Please be aware that should you continue to use the discontinued version(s), you may be at risk of potential claims of infringement by third parties."

https://www.vice.com …oCt53FkdhEivo8f​mPCD8ITH6M

It was discussed starting at post 115

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18859376

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18860567

Perhaps you will allow one final comment from Harald Heim, http://www.thepluginsi​te.com/

Adobe recently warned its customers that by using older CC software, e.g. Photoshop CC to CC 2017, Lightroom CC 6 and older, they "may be at risk of potential claims of infringement by third parties". Wait. Really? How is this possible? Who f-cked up here?

Ok, let me reconstruct the events for you as I understood them: Last year Dolby sued Adobe and claims that Adobe had not paid enough license fees since the Creative Cloud started and did not let them audit records to determine the correct fees as contractually agreed. Apparently the law suit is not going in Adobe's favor, because Adobe has recently removed all the downloads of older CC apps. This makes sure that Adobe does not have to pay Dolby anything in future. Newer CC apps use the Dolby code via the OS. So let Apple and Microsoft pay Dolby instead, which they have already been doing anyway, and that without being sued first.

Could Adobe have done anything differently? Well how about reaching a friendly agreement with Dolby and keeping the old CC apps available? No way, would have cost even more license fees. They could have removed all Dolby code from old CC apps, but again too much effort and costs. So why not simply let costumers bear the costs of e.g. upgrading computers for using the newer CC versions or training employees for using them? Additionally Adobe saves bandwidth, cloud space and avoids support requests, which again means fewer costs and more money for the beloved Adobe shareholders. What a great solution for everyone!

By the way, if you think of subscribing to the Creative Cloud, please read this article: adobe-test-replaces-10-month-photography-plan-with-1tb-20-month-option.

Adobe would like to double the price of their Photography plan, so they randomly presented every n-th person on their site with a double price offer that includes more (cheap) cloud space. What does this mean? It means that if enough people go for the higher price, then the higher price will become effective for everyone.

You really have to love these guys. They are so clever. No wonder they are the best! And I still did not buy a single Adobe share yet. What a negligence of me.

Kind regards,
Harald Heim

The Plugin Site

I didn't know there were 10 months in a year. I must have purchased a knockoff calendar because mine says 12 months. My plan is also on an annual basis but I only paid for 10 months this year.

My iMac is from 2011 and I'm using the latest apps. The only reason I'm finally replacing it in a few months has nothing to do with Adobe. Apple will be releasing the next OS sometime this fall. Currently it is Mojave and I could not update last year as I missed the cutoff date by one year. You could only get Mojave with 2012 and newer. I like to use the latest versions to keep up with security changes, etc. I consider getting OS upgrades at no cost since 2011 pretty good. 8 years not so bad between computer upgrades.

So how old is the equipment people are trying to hang on to that won't run the latest apps? 12 years? I have read about people who are hanging on to LR5 and still running El Capitan because of that. Have a look to see how old that is.

https://support.apple.​com/en-us/HT206886

So for hardware, computer and OS updates - things change. Upgrading is a personal choice and if someone wants to hang on to their computer for 15 years due to apps good for them but they will eventually start to fall behind on many things.

Adobe pulled LR5 and earlier versions off their site but if you call them and have a legal license they will give it to you.

As for earlier CC versions besides being mid project I don't understand why someone would not want to update to the latest versions. They are paying for and entitled to them. I guess they are trying to hang to antique gear? It would take too long to list how many good and useful changes there have been since Version 7 to the current 8.3. I don't know why anyone would still want to use LR CC 2015.

As for being sued I doubt that would happen. I have friends who bragged about using pirated versions for years. They told me one guy at work had stacks of CD's at his place and you could get whatever you want. I have never heard of a single person getting into trouble. Apparently you can get current pirated CC versions as well.

I don't know about what is going on between Adobe and Dolby and I don't care. I didn't get any emails and my price didn't change. Will they for "current" customers? Maybe, maybe not. There are tons of sites I can find that speculate. Easy to do because Adobe is like Microsoft, not well liked. If I get an email telling me there is an unacceptable price increase I'm only 20 seconds from this (attached image). I couldn't care about Adobe and I'd drop them in a heart beat. I'll miss it because it because their products are excellent.

So who screwed up? Adobe because they have lawyers sending out emails written in lawyer talk. We know how much people like lawyers and how much the general population understands legal documents. Didn't take the time to think how a few words can blow things up. It would be different one on one but sending this out in mass is another thing. I'm sure there are people who could have crafted that much better. I'm not supporting them, they are just shrewd as any big corporation. I have a far greater dislike for cable companies but I still use them.

That's the way of providing stellar customer service! Threaten them with lawsuits, and double the price of the product. Time to bend over and take it folks.

Please show me where the price has doubled. I have never seen the word threaten uised quite a bit. It is not Adobe doing any suing and all customers have to do is update to the newer versions, which are free. They may have handled it poorly which pretty much everyone agrees but they did inform their customers. I'm still waiting to read about Dolby suing an Adobe customer. Doubt I ever will.

.
Thank you so much for that information, Elie. . I really appreciate it.

I had asked over and over again in this thread who these 3rd parties were, and I don't believe I got any specific answers until you posted these details.


.

Here you go:
https://petapixel.com …om-site-cheapest-is-20-mo

digital paradise wrote in post #18870885
Please show me where the price has doubled. I have never seen the word threaten uised quite a bit. It is not Adobe doing any suing and all customers have to do is update to the newer versions, which are free. They may have handled it poorly which pretty much everyone agrees but they did inform their customers. I'm still waiting to read about Dolby suing an Adobe customer. Doubt I ever will.

eddieb1 wrote in post #18871229
Here you go:
https://petapixel.com …om-site-cheapest-is-20-mo

Awesome. Nothing like old, outdated and inaccurate information. Thanks for posting an article from a few weeks ago that had another typical knee jerk reaction from a one day market test that many companies do. It is called split testing. Look it up. Adobe didn't invent it.

Here is a dose of reality for you. You are just another poster which I suspect doesn't own the product and just pipes up for no reason. You don't have any idea of what you are talking about. Come back when you are ready to post some facts, not the fantasy you hope for.

The US site from few minutes ago.

.
In all fairness to Eddie, the price actually did double for a few hours, to some people in select markets. . Even if it is done as a market test, if the advertised price is double, then yes, it did double ..... at least momentarily.

.

Well it does get tiring reading posts from people who read a headline, don't know the whole story and post based on that. I guess I got a little ticked when someone told me I'm bending over and taking it. I found that quite rude. Perhaps asking some questions before stating something might have been a better approach.

digital paradise wrote in post #18871645
Well it does get tiring reading posts from people who read a headline, don't know the whole story and post based on that. I guess I got a little ticked when someone told me I'm bending over and taking it. I found that quite rude. Perhaps asking some questions before stating something might have been a better approach.

Damn we’re touchy. Back when The rumors were that Adobe was thinking about subscriptions, they said they were going to test in a few markets to see how people would receive it. They said the perpetual license would stay. Most were not in favor of subscriptions. Well Adobe has did it anyway along with dropping perpetual licensing. So if prior acts indicate anything, the $20 per month is not far off. And I didn’t pick you when I made the bend over comment. I included myself. So settle down. Jeesh!

eddieb1 wrote in post #18871669
Damn we’re touchy. Back when The rumors were that Adobe was thinking about subscriptions, they said they were going to test in a few markets to see how people would receive it. They said the perpetual license would stay. Most were not in favor of subscriptions. Well Adobe has did it anyway along with dropping perpetual licensing. So if prior acts indicate anything, the $20 per month is not far off. And I didn’t pick you when I made the bend over comment. I included myself. So settle down. Jeesh!

Damn we are are sure misinformed and full of speculation. You again are incorrect. Adobe said perpetual would be indefinite and I can provide links to that exact statement.

https://www.google.com …=firefox-b-d&q=indefinate

Do you have statistics to prove most were not in favor of subscription. Their success does not seem to reflect that.

"And I didn’t pick you when I made the bend over comment". You said it and I'm an LR user.

Big bad Adobe.

https://www.fredmirand​a.com …/topic/1594637/​6#14870992

I paid $600 for CS2 in 2005. Today I'm getting far more for $10 a month which includes an integrated website.

I purchased DXO PL last year and within a few months PL 2 came out and I stopped updates. I have been using Adobe products since 2005 I have never seen that happen. Stand alone had about an 18 month turn around so you would at least get a year or so of updates. I contacted DXO and they told me too bad.

Last year I read complaints about C1 which is also on an annual upgrade plan. People who purchased it within a few months of the annual upgrade had to cough up another $150 to get the latest version. I can tell you within a day when C1 13 will come out this fall.