C'mon now Bob, you've worked for large organizations, at lest the USArmy
and NYTimes.
I can see the meetings and hear the participants when that paragraph was
created. They were aware of the hoorah over images taken from Flikr and
other public sharing sites and used for advertising and such like.
Somebody proposed the obvious solution - obvious to a corporate attorney
focused only on minimizing corporate risk, that is. The solution is to
retain for Adobe all the same rights of ownership the creator also
retains in tandem. That way, ANYTHING Adobe does, or allows anyone else
to do, with the image, even through inaction, is within their rights and
leaves the original rights owner with no cause of action against Adobe.
Then when potential customers point out why this might leave them
non-customers, someone beyond legal, and concerned with profits as well
as risk, gets involved....
"Therefore, our legal team is making it a priority to post revised terms
that are more appropriate for Photoshop Express users." means "We have
told our lawyers to figure out another way to cover our asses that
doesn't piss potential customers off."
A. Moose
- whose life experience has included more work with accountants,
lawyers, tax versions of both of the the foregoing and PR people than
might seem strictly necessary to a full life.
Bob Whitmire wrote:
> Saw this over on DeePee. Seems Adobe's been hearing about the fine print.
>
> "Statement for Terms of Service Issues:
> We've heard your concerns about the terms of service for Photoshop Express
> beta. We reviewed the terms in context of your comments - and we agree that
> it currently implies things we would never do with the content. Therefore,
> our legal team is making it a priority to post revised terms that are more
> appropriate for Photoshop Express users. We will alert you once we have
> posted new terms.
>
> Thank you for your feedback on Photoshop Express beta and we appreciate your
> input.
>
> -Adobe Photoshop Express Team"
>
>
> You gotta wonder, though, why they didn't just hit the delete key on
> that paragraph. "Legal team is making it a priority" and "terms more
> appropriate for Photoshop Express users" smack of Newspeak. Do you
> think they're going to take a stab at rephrasing in such a way that
> they think we won't figure out they own the content?
>
> Not that anything coming out of corporate HQs these days doesn't
> smack of Newspeak. Or governments. Everywhere except here. No wonder
> I like this place.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|