2 ms·
IANAL, but it seems to me that this is meaningless, vague, non-enforceable legal dribble, probably designed as some kind of catch-all for internal purposes (ind
by temporallobe 2y ago
IANAL, but it seems to me that this is meaningless, vague, non-enforceable legal dribble, probably designed as some kind of catch-all for internal purposes (indeed, it even says it’s for “operating or improving the Services or Software”). Obviously Adobe would still be subject to copyright infringement laws if they were to ever actually use a client’s work for profit. This TOS does not exempt a corporation from an entire class of laws designed to protect copyright holders.
- qarl 2y agoYes, that's exactly what Instagram argued when they changed their TOS, too. And now they're training AI on your images. Never trust a corporation when it says "trust us".
- Buttons840 2y agoIANAL. See the part about "grant license". This is all about copyright. Legalese seems to be a "choose your own adventure"--or rather, "choose your own permutation"--that results in many simple statements. One of those simple statements would be: "For the purposes of improving the software, you grant us license to create derivative works based on your content."
- temporallobe 2y agoI get what you’re saying, but consider that I could take someone’s work of art and create infinite derivatives of it, which is not illegal, unless I try to claim them as my own and sell them.
- thombat 2y agoAt least in the USA it seems you need permission for derivative works regardless of your intent in making them: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/derivative_work https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/derivative_work