Adobe is one among the leading traditional enterprise software vendors leveraging generative AI and making it accessible to users, for instance with its proprietary (and enterprise-safe) Firefly AI image generation model, Generative Fill and other Gen AI features in Photoshop, and—just today—an AI assistant for its customer experience software, and rather more.
However, the corporate has also faced backlash from a few of its users and Adobe Stock contributors for this pro-Gen AI stance. And recently, as Gen AI technology as a complete is facing an increasing variety of critics and doubtersAdobe has run into trouble because users should conform to recent terms of service before they’ll proceed using the corporate's apps.
(The terms of service don't actually mention AI, except for a reference to “machine learning,” which will be used to coach general AI models but additionally many other programs, and a clause saying that AI models can’t be trained using Adobe software.)
Adobe's terms of service, sent this week to many purchasers of Adobe's Creative Cloud suite (which has greater than 20 million users worldwide), state:
The screenshot of the message I received when accessing Adobe Firefly on the net can also be embedded below:
In the meantime, click on the Full link to Terms of Use The information contained within the notification directs the user here, where you’ll be able to read sections 2.2, 4.1, 5.3 and 14.1 in additional detail.
It is section 2.2 of the updated Adobe Terms of Service that has really enraged a handful of users on social media, namely X. This section states:
In particular, users have objected to Adobe's claim that the corporate “may access, view, or hearken to your content, each automated and manual… using techniques comparable to machine learning to enhance our services and software and the user experience.” Many interpreted this as a tacit admission that the corporate monitors them and trains artificial intelligence on their content, even content that’s confidential to customers and guarded by non-disclosure agreements or confidentiality clauses/contracts between said Adobe users and customers.
Even Hollywood directors like Duncan Jones (also the son of the late music icon David Bowie) posted statements on X criticizing the corporate for updating its terms of service language (Jones has since deleted his post, though). I'm posting it for the general public record below.
One enterprising user also posted a screenshot annotated to point out the language changes from the immediately previous Adobe Terms of Service from 2023 to the brand new ones.
However, section 4.1 clarifies that:
“We don’t review all content uploaded to the Services and Software, but we may use available technologies, vendors or processes, including manual review, to screen for certain varieties of illegal content (comparable to child sexual abuse material) or other abusive content or behavior (comparable to activity patterns indicating spam or phishing, or keywords indicating that adult content has been posted outside of the adult wall).”
Ultimately, Adobe appears to be trying to provide itself permission to investigate and moderate content uploaded to users' Adobe-managed Creative Cloud accounts for possible illegal activities (comparable to child abuse, physical abuse, and non-consensual pornography) or terms of service violations.
An Adobe spokesperson issued the next statement in response to VentureBeat's questions on the brand new terms of service and the vocal backlash:
In addition, sources near Adobe identified that the corporate doesn’t analyze Adobe file formats stored locally on a user's drive or machine, neither is it technically in a position to accomplish that. In addition, the evaluation of content uploaded to Creative Cloud or edited in a connected Adobe app is completed primarily to supply a few of the recent Gen AI features, comparable to automated generative backgrounds and removal tools.
While Adobe has not committed to not training using user content, the corporate has previously trained Firefly and various AI features using content uploaded by contributors to Adobe Stock, its image library. Adobe has stated through various channels that that is legal and ethical under its own terms of service for the service.
Still, the anomaly surrounding the Terms of Service and the rise of Gen-AI content online has led many to precise their desire and intention to cancel their subscriptions to Adobe Creative Cloud or software apps. We could have to attend and see if this latest backlash – one among many to varied ToS updates of many services online through the years – could have a fabric impact on the corporate's business.
