Adobe has faced backlash over changes to its terms of service agreement over the past few weeks, and now it’s trying to patch things up. On Tuesday, Adobe announced a tweaked version of its terms of service agreement, making it clear that the company will not train artificial intelligence on user content stored locally or in the cloud.
The section that defines Adobe’s access to user content now includes several different categories, including one dedicated to generating AI. Adobe’s updated terms clearly state that its software “does not use your local or cloud content to train artificial intelligence.” But there’s one exception: If your work is submitted to the Adobe Stock marketplace, the company can use it to train Adobe Firefly.
Adobe chief strategy officer Scott Belsky said the additions to these terms of service don’t actually change anything — Adobe said its stance on AI training was just not clearly stated before, leading to confusion. “We’ve made it clear that we are not training generative AI on your content,” Belsky said in an interview. edge. “This has always been a policy of our company. We’ve always made it clear, but we’ve never said it explicitly.
The new terms also address user concerns about Adobe scanning content created under non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), saying the company will not “scan or review” works stored locally on your device. Adobe will only automatically scan content uploaded to the cloud to “ensure we are not hosting illegal or abusive content, such as child sexual abuse material.” If a work uploaded to the cloud is flagged or reported as illegal, or if you opt-in to pre-release, Beta version or Adobe’s product improvement plan, it will only conduct manual review of works uploaded to the cloud.
Adobe caused an uproar earlier this month over changes to its terms of service agreement, after users mistakenly believed the changes allowed the company to use its works for artificial intelligence training. The protests stem from creatives who are frustrated by the excessive corporate control over the creative industries. Even the federal government has taken notice of user complaints against Adobe, and the Justice Department is suing the company, saying it concealed expensive cancellation fees and made it difficult to cancel subscriptions.
Many users’ dissatisfaction can be traced to Adobe’s shift to a subscription-only model in 2012, which Belsky acknowledged was a point of contention. “I think it’s a change for some customers that may have a negative impact on them,” Belsky said. “I think when something like this [the terms of service update] My observation when this happens is that we see this frustration coming back. This may have been baked in when we changed the model.
It’s great that Adobe is tweaking its terms of service to be more transparent, but this may just be a small patch in a larger wound that may take more time and closer attention to heal.
