30 ms·

> You’ve charged me, when will I get my refund? > We are unable to issue refunds. Executive order 13884, orders the cessation of all activity with the entities

> You’ve charged me, when will I get my refund? > We are unable to issue refunds. Executive order 13884, orders the cessation of all activity with the entities including no sales, service, support, refunds, credits, etc.

gruez 7y ago
chargeback?
- farisjarrah 7y ago
  Adobe is presumably using American banks. Those banks are bound by the same(if not more strict) rules that Adobe is, likely Adobes customers are just screwed out of the money unless the US solves this dispute. Hopefully this drives up adoption of other FOSS graphical processing programs like GIMP/Glimpse, Krita, InkScape, etc
jazzyjackson 7y ago
well that's convenient for adobe's bottom line
- nicholsonpk 7y ago
  Sure, today. I think Adobe would have preferred to get their continued monthly revenue from those users in the long run. I don't think they're quoting the law here because it benefits them.
  - spurdoman77 7y ago
    Yeah true. Though they could have made a strict verifying process so that they ensure only non-govermental people can be their customers. However that would also be very expensive to implement.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      If they could/wanted to do that, they could also use it to not deactivate non-governmental accounts in the first place. (I can believe they could have wanted it, but it would take time, and I suppose getting compliant with an executive order of the President is something you want to do as fast as possible.)
- derefr 7y ago
  Presumably, if they had Venezuelan accounts-receivable, they would no longer be allowed to collect on them, either.
meiraleal 7y ago
Some days ago a big discussion here in HN was about FCPA preventing American companies overseas. Well, you don't need to be corrupt if your government always do the dirty work for you.
azdle 7y ago
> (c) The prohibitions in subsections (a)–(b) of this section apply [...] notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order. Page 1 of https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/13884.pdf https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/... Kinda seems like there's no excuse for going about it this way.

gruez 7y ago

chargeback?

farisjarrah 7y ago
Adobe is presumably using American banks. Those banks are bound by the same(if not more strict) rules that Adobe is, likely Adobes customers are just screwed out of the money unless the US solves this dispute. Hopefully this drives up adoption of other FOSS graphical processing programs like GIMP/Glimpse, Krita, InkScape, etc

jazzyjackson 7y ago

well that's convenient for adobe's bottom line

nicholsonpk 7y ago
Sure, today. I think Adobe would have preferred to get their continued monthly revenue from those users in the long run. I don't think they're quoting the law here because it benefits them.
- spurdoman77 7y ago
  Yeah true. Though they could have made a strict verifying process so that they ensure only non-govermental people can be their customers. However that would also be very expensive to implement.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    If they could/wanted to do that, they could also use it to not deactivate non-governmental accounts in the first place. (I can believe they could have wanted it, but it would take time, and I suppose getting compliant with an executive order of the President is something you want to do as fast as possible.)
derefr 7y ago
Presumably, if they had Venezuelan accounts-receivable, they would no longer be allowed to collect on them, either.

meiraleal 7y ago

Some days ago a big discussion here in HN was about FCPA preventing American companies overseas. Well, you don't need to be corrupt if your government always do the dirty work for you.

azdle 7y ago

> (c) The prohibitions in subsections (a)–(b) of this section apply [...] notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order. Page 1 of https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/13884.pdf https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/... Kinda seems like there's no excuse for going about it this way.