Is Adobe Really AI Training on Your Private Files?

Join this channel to get access to perks:

-----------------------------------------------------

Twitter:

Instagram:

Drawing Tech Top 10 lists:

My Drawing and video gear:

[robt]

They chose their language in the Blog post very carefully when they said "Adobe does not train Firefly Gen AI models on customer content". This language is specific to "Adobe" being the trainer and "Firefly Gen AI" being the model; it ought to say "Adobe will never permit customer works to be used in training Generative AI models of any type", or something similar. This language still leaves Adobe room to use customer content.

[suzerainty]

What makes me not believe them, and what's making me finally cancel my Photoshop subscription, is the fact that Kyle T Webster (official brush maker for Photoshop for years now) announced his resignation from Adobe a week ago. Someone commented on his Cara announcement "With the decisions Adobe has been making, publicly separating yourself from them is such a powerful statement for us artists." Kyle responded with a raised fist emoji so I'm not inclined to believe in Adobe's innocence.

[meredithweston]

"We only train on licensed content"
"Btw since you're using our service we have a license to your content"

[didi]

😅 Artists PAY to use Adobe products, hundreds of dollars per year and they want to use OUR art for FREE to make more money? Fu k them

[michaelryan]

I'm feeling more and more glad I cancelled my Photoshop sub today and replaced it with CSP. Even if they're not using customer files for AI training, the fact that they've changed t+c to retroactively allow this before means they aren't above doing it again. Thanks for sharing, Brad.

[christianr.]

Them saying firefly “doesn’t” train off their user’s content is a lot different than saying it “won’t”. It’s like saying I’m not punching you in the face. Doesn’t mean they never will

[PaulBalchin]

The last line of every EULA ever: "The Company reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time without prior notice."

[uncleeric]

The bit that gets me is this: "may access your content through both automated and manual methods, such as for content review." "

[PixelSubstream]

In the past: if the product is free, then you are the product.
Today: if the product is in the cloud, then you are the product.

[franciscodetonne]

Welp, I guess it's time to either find alternatives or sail the high seas.

[jamesbullo]

They literally said they only train AI on licensed content and that they do not own customers work. But their terms dont say they own your work, they say by using their services you are licensing your content to them.
All they did was repeat themselves.

[steppedon]

Limiting the scope of the TOS to "Firefly" and using the word "Ownership" is all the legal nuance that you need. People (not you) have Adobe Stock amnesia and it's only been a few months. No wonder this company keeps trampling on their user base. Look at their commercials. Look at their target audience in all of their marketing. It's non-creatives. It's corporations who who don't want to hire more than a single designer. It's the person who needs marketing materials but doesn't want to pay to have them designed. WE, THE CREATIVES, ARE THE FOOD.

[KayfabeGames]

Daily reminder that Affinity is currently having a flash sale if you're looking to give up Photoshop.

[Lissbirds]

So basically Adobe pulled a Darth Vader. "I have altered the deal. Pray I don't alter it further."

[ashlin]

If Procreate ever does something like this I’ll just give up on digital art altogether

[DaveBarrack]

It doesn't matter what they say they're doing. Adobe is a corporation, which means they'll do anything they can get away with until they can't get away with it anymore, and then they'll just be like "Oops, we had the "steal art" option set to on instead of off. We'll do better in the future." And we'll be like "...and you'll turn off the steal art option, right? Come to think of it, why is there a steal art option in the first place." And Adobe will be all "Or commitment to our customers is meaningless because we're a publicly traded company so we're actually beholden to the shareholders and everyone else can spin on it." And we'll be like "You didn't say you'd turn off the art theft, and you also said the quiet part out loud."

[superchristopher]

Glad i jumped off Adobe years ago. I was young and didn't understand I was under contract, so i couldn't just cancel, then the contract renewed automatically, so my introductory rate of $10 was no more. And as a college student working in fast food, was stuck paying $27 a month for a year. And it was gonna cost me over $150 to cancel it. So once that was done i said no more to Photoshop and haven't looked back since. They've been predatory for a long time

[michelefrost]

I know someone personally, outside of any business / consumer context, who's a senior VP. I broke our unwritten rule and emailed him about this, mostly to get a sense of the mood at Adobe. They are in full bunker mode, definitely didn't think it would blow up like it has. Apparently it's even worse than the stories and media ... creatives are bailing at a rapid pace. Affinity had a 50% off flash sale this weekend to capitalize on it and seem to have picked up a lot of new users

[eduardofrances]

They say they won't use to train Firefly, but they didn't say anything about training other AIs though and leaving this out of their explanation is REALLY worrisome.
I am so glad that I never took onto Adobe's subscription services ever.
Edit: LMAO the ad that YouTube decided to roll at the end of the video? Photoshop's AI image creation, is this hell?

[MarceloGil]

Saying they are not using our work to train Firefly is very specific. Are they using it to train a different new model?