![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
They don't need a licence to generate a thumbnail, since it's not them generating the thumbnail, it is you using their software's functionality that involves generating thumbnails, that you can choose to share.
It’s part and parcel of the Byzantine nature of copyright laws. Made a resized copy for display by automation without a license? Potential violation. Made a copy to some other storage system by automation? Potential violation.
I can see them generating a bunch of thumbnails when you upload a file (having different size requirement than an usual explorer icon would have):
Given this isn't the first time this exact kind of concern has come up, you would think a big company that was smart and on the ball could add a few simple English sentences explaining they need these rights to do those things, but somehow they never do, and then are all shocked Pikachu face when people freak out. How strange.
IANAL, and I maintain that most lawyers aren't really people anymore after a certain amount of time practicing law. To them, they know what they meant, and that their overly broad terms are a simple set of ass-covering statements, while to us they're trying to take ownership of our stuff (because in non legalese it sure as hell reads that way, whatever the intent). I've seen similar, but not identical phrases in EULAs before for photo/file sharing services, but to my memory they used phrases like 'non-exclusive license' for them to duplicate the 'work' as needed for the operation of the platform.
Perfectly legal to scam someone in USA. It's only illegal to fight back.
My point is that they are not generating the thumbnails for kicks on their own, they are specifically generated for the user who uploaded their stuff. Therefore it is not adobe doing it, but the end user using adobe software. Adobe doesn't need a license to your works for you to be able to edit them using photoshop either.
So does google need a license for my copyrighted material when I upload it to drive?
It’s probably buried in the EULA somewhere that you granted them some rights to copy and distribute your material. You have eyes, go read what you agreed to.
It was a hypothetical, I don't actually use google drive. I just used it as an example. But if they have similar terms that doesn't make adobe's OK, it just means both of them are overreaching.
I am not sure what you mean if I upload on the cloud a file called MyProject.psd, without providing them a 100x100, 300x300 600x600 thumbnails for their different gui (thumbnail I would have never needed on my local computer), if they make thumbnails from that file, they need to open it and do an "artwork" directly from its content.
Yes, enterprise and I consider it a decent size account, I've gotten ahold of a reseller for Adobe and they explained exactly what is happening and why it's happening, and basically, my admin account is fudged up and they are pretty sure they know how it got fudged up.
good.(ftc suit)
I wonder how this will affect the poor shareholders. Why doesn't anyone think of them?
The problem is that Adobe is as close to a monopoly as you can get, and they've essentially "Won" the game. The issue here is that the world keeps turning and there is no "Winning" and Adobe needs to find SOME way to return an increase in value to their shareholders while essentially having NOWHERE higher to go. You climbed Everest, and reached the peak, but shareholders demand you always go higher and higher. It doesn't matter HOW you do it. Just make more money. More. More. Line go up. More is better than All. Have everything? you don't have more. Already have more? Still need more.
Can they, though?
This is why Adobe has gotten away with this kind of crap for so long. As an example, I learned Photoshop years ago and don't know how to use any other image manipulation tool. Everything else (including Photoshop Elements) all seemed entirely backwards to me. So I keep my Adobe subscription for just that reason. However, I've reached a point where I've had to trim costs everywhere I can thanks to rising costs for just about everything and I don't think I'm alone in looking to cut spending on subscriptions. As it is, I've cut out all the streaming services except Amazon Prime.
As a Lightroom and Photoshop user I can say that Adobe has seriously embraced AI in some recent releases. Can't speak for the rest of Creative Cloud.
AI is in many other parts of Adobe as well. I use it frequently. I tried Affinity and other products again, and it looks like I'm sticking with Adobe, despite their BS.
depends on what you need to do. reader is basically pointless when all web browsers can view pdfs. and windows can "save to pdf" now too. so...
Sadly none of the browsers work with form fillable PDF’s correctly. So very annoying.
hence: "depends on what you need to do"
Another serious deficiency is their support for JS. I used to maintain a site that would use JS embedded in PDFs to fill in a form, and almost every year one browser or another would either suddenly stop supporting it or suddenly start. Very annoying.
I used to service Sharp MFPs. The control boards recognized US currency, maybe others, and would refuse to copy or scan in color when currency was detected. I think they might have blocked B/W imaging as well but it’s been over a decade since that job.