FORUMS: list search recent posts

New petition directed to department of justice

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Ricardo Marty
New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 1:34:35 pm

Spread the word to all interested

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/ask-doj-investigate-adobe-systems...


Return to posts index

Kris Merkel
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 3:21:13 pm

Are you really that upset that you would waste the governments money and time investigating a company who's software you really want to use but have a ideological problem with. What would possibly be the point and desired outcome of this action?

Not trying to be crass, but don't we all have more pressing issues to deal with, like billing for instance. Now that I have wasted 30 sec of my time about thinking how ridiculous a course of action this is I feel dirty.

"Think of everything in terms of building capacity."

Kris Merkel
twitter: @kris_merkel
Product Manager, Flanders Scientific Inc.
http://www.shopfsi.com
Co-Founder, Atlanta Cutters Post Production User Group
http://www.atlantacutters.com

2.2Ghz MBP core i7
16Gb RAM
CS6/FCP7
AJA T-Tap
AJA IO XT
FSI LM-2461W/CM-170W







Return to posts index

Joseph W. Bourke
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 3:39:15 pm

In addition to Kris's comments, this is also going to water down the numbers on the other petition - you're going to end up taking signatures away from the other one, by confusing people with the new one. You only want one petition, and hopefully it will include everyone who's upset about the new system.

Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 4:10:37 pm

Wow, really?




Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 4:33:06 pm

There is are issues such as content rights.
I did not start this petition and no it will not delute any other petition.
This petition can be made by any user or not. Its a question of rights.

Ricardo


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 5:36:29 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "Its a question of rights."

Life, liberty, persuit of happiness. Those are rights. How companies charge for software you have the OPTION to use...isn't. You have the right to use other software.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Ricardo Marty
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 6:12:18 pm

But the use of my content in perpetuity is my right.

Ricardo


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 18, 2013 at 12:31:11 am

[Ricardo Marty] "But the use of my content in perpetuity is my right.

Ricardo"


I'm sorry, man. This is delusional. Render it out. There's YOUR content.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 19, 2013 at 3:31:12 am

[Chris Harlan] "I'm sorry, man. This is delusional. Render it out. There's YOUR content."

Sorry Chris. I think you're off on this one. Dave LaRonde nailed it in this post:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/1251

The project file = your labor.

I don't want any company charging me rent to access my work.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 19, 2013 at 3:51:20 am

[David Lawrence] "[Chris Harlan] "I'm sorry, man. This is delusional. Render it out. There's YOUR content."

Sorry Chris. I think you're off on this one. Dave LaRonde nailed it in this post:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/1251

The project file = your labor.

I don't want any company charging me rent to access my work.
"


Really?! I get that it feels that way, but you actually believe that there is legal case to be brought against Adobe? That the Justice department needs to intervene? I can't even begin to see that. I think the idea is laughable. But, hey, break a leg.

I also don't agree with the notion that The project file = your labor. It may contain some of your labor, but it also clearly contains elements that are owned by Adobe. It is, in essence, where your labor and Adobe's labor meet. I think it fitting that neither of you can benefit from it once you part company.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 19, 2013 at 4:12:14 am

[Chris Harlan] "Really?! I get that it feels that way, but you actually believe that there is legal case to be brought against Adobe? That the Justice department needs to intervene? I can't even begin to see that. I think the idea is laughable. But, hey, break a leg."

Nah, I'm not saying this anywhere close to the bar that needs to be met for a legal case at this time. I'm just saying that it's not as far-fetched as it seems.

Even though this country's been getting more and more lax about it, we do still regulate private industries. If Adobe wants to become a service provider like the cable companies, maybe it should be regulated like the cable companies. Rights and protections are not exclusively for corporations.

[Chris Harlan] " also don't agree with the notion that The project file = your labor. It may contain some of your labor, but it also clearly contains elements that are owned by Adobe. It is, in essence, where your labor and Adobe's labor meet. I think it fitting that neither of you can benefit from it once you part company."

Disagree. The project file is the direct expression of my labor. Yes, it's enabled by Adobe's software and I'm willing to pay them a fair price for that capability. I'm not willing to pay a perpetual price, which is what they are now asking. If I fail to pay a perpetual price, Adobe revokes access to my labor. That's a pretty big stick. The power is fully in their hands under a rental model. I don't like it.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 19, 2013 at 5:12:31 am

[David Lawrence] "Nah, I'm not saying this anywhere close to the bar that needs to be met for a legal case at this time."

Glad to hear it. The above comments you were responding to weren't general ones, but specific to the notion of getting the Justice Department to pursue Adobe for High Crimes and Misdemeanors or whatever it is the petition was going for.


[David Lawrence] "Even though this country's been getting more and more lax about it, we do still regulate private industries. If Adobe wants to become a service provider like the cable companies, maybe it should be regulated like the cable companies. Rights and protections are not exclusively for corporations.
"


FWIW, cable company regulation is mostly a state and local affair. Most of it happens at a municipality level, if at all. If Adobe controlled a lot more of the market, the FTC could look at anti-competative practices, but as it is, that's just not going to happen. I cannot see for the life of me how Adobe is violating anyone's rights, here, or a sustainable argument that consumers need protection or relief from them.


[David Lawrence] "I'm not willing to pay a perpetual price, which is what they are now asking. If I fail to pay a perpetual price, Adobe revokes access to my labor. That's a pretty big stick. The power is fully in their hands under a rental model. I don't like it.
"


I totally get it. Again, what I was saying above is about making some sort of legal case against them. The model doesn't bother me because of the way I use their programs, and because I've spent many long years shuffling material between completely incompatible systems. I'm used to thinking that way. I started out in a time when an .edl--on punch tape, no less--represented the sum total of metadata available, so XML and AFF still seem like miracles to me. Also, after the X Affair, I'm determined not to be the prisoner of one set of tools. But I understand why it pisses so many people off, and am sympathetic. If AE were my primary tool, or if I were a web designer who relied heavily on the suite, I think I'd probably have quite different feelings.


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 6:25:14 pm

I've personally contacted the hague. Spent two hours on the phone with them. Mary Robinson, the former Irish President, is, as we speak, assembling a crack team to push this one through the world criminal court.

She is apparently a heavy indesign user, and I'm telling you, she's not happy. She mentioned "seeing where Quarkxpress was at."

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 18, 2013 at 12:32:49 am

It took me some time to stop laughing after this particular line:

[Aindreas Gallagher] "She is apparently a heavy indesign user, and I'm telling you, she's not happy. She mentioned "seeing where Quarkxpress was at.""


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 6:31:00 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "There is are issues such as content rights."

This one might be a hard sale in terms of a legal remedy.

As irritating as I find it that Adobe wants me to pay a subscription fee to open an old project, I still retain rights to what was created within the software and all the files used. Adobe in no way gets any ownership of such. I am just locked from altering within their software if I am not current on subscription.

The truth is that the software also provides outs so the project can be exported, such as XML, and opened (imperfectly I admit) in other software. And as long as I retain the original files, I can recreate from scratch. I don't think this is ideal and I don't necessarily like that CC does this. But claiming that somehow this business model is removing my content ownership has no legal basis IMHO.

The truth is that in the 1990s I created a series of animations using Deluxe Paint. I still have this disks but no Amiga (my 1000 bit the dust a long time ago). The animation I created is still mine, and just because I can no longer access the software or hardware I used to create it does not remove that ownership.

I know this is a big issue, but it is one I do not think the Justice Department can address.


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 19, 2013 at 3:41:35 am

[Clint Wardlow] "I know this is a big issue, but it is one I do not think the Justice Department can address."

I realize people think this petition is completely frivolous, but here's a thought experiment:

Let's say Microsoft decided that going forward, all copies of Office would be rental only. Future files from Word and Excel would become incompatible with all earlier Office versions and in order to open them, you'd have to pay Microsoft rent forever. Think the Feds would be interested? I do. Remember, Microsoft went thu anti-trust hearings in the past. I'm sure they'd love to go to a pure SaS business model but I think they're going slow for a reason. And you can be sure they're learning from Adobe's mistakes.

BTW, I didn't sign this Fed petition because I don't think it'll reach the 100K threshold. I signed the Change.org one that currently has close to 17K signatures and has no sign of slowing down.

http://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-ma...

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 20, 2013 at 7:34:03 pm

[David Lawrence] "Let's say Microsoft decided that going forward, all copies of Office would be rental only. Future files from Word and Excel would become incompatible with all earlier Office versions and in order to open them, you'd have to pay Microsoft rent forever. Think the Feds would be interested? I do. Remember, Microsoft went thu anti-trust hearings in the past. I'm sure they'd love to go to a pure SaS business model but I think they're going slow for a reason. And you can be sure they're learning from Adobe's mistakes."

Actually, I would like to see more legal oversight of EULAs in general (not just Adobe). They are pretty much aimed at giving the customer as few rights as possible IMHO.

I have to admit the bit of legalize that allows Adobe to cut off your service at any time at their discretion is a bit worrisome. I don't think this is a practice they would engage in frivolously because it would kill their business. Who would ever sign up for a service that was notorious for lopping off users at the drop of a hat? But still it gives one pause.

So new laws protecting consumers from particularly lopp-sided EULAs wouldn't break my heart.

As to big software companies moving to a subscription-only model, they have to be very careful. If the private consumer or business operating close to margin's pocketbook is too taxed by many many subscription charges, they will stop using them and looking to alternatives. This will in effect limit various software brands to a business-only customer base, which in the end could be devastating to their bottom line. Such niche markets are often not all that profitable.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 20, 2013 at 8:43:09 pm

[David Lawrence] "but here's a thought experiment:"

Not to be the continual thorn, but this may not be the best example, considering that conversion from .doc, .docx, .xls, and .xlsx are simple and generally invisible in almost every available word processor and spreadsheet on the planet, from Pages to google Docs. Add to that all of the other available conversion standards from RTF to PDF--I don't think the Feds would even blink, at least over that. If I stopped using Microsoft tomorrow, I could still open and use anything I've ever written.


Return to posts index


Tim Kolb
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 4:46:29 pm

Seriously?

Who writes these things?

First off, I see no timeline of events that verify this assertion:

"Via tactics such as hostile takeovers, backroom deals with distributors and short-term predatory pricing, Adobe attained a monopoly over the creative software market. No serious challenger has existed since 2005."

Hostile takeover? When was that? Who was competing with them for Macromedia? Who was even resisting them? Do you even understand what a "hostile takeover" is? (I don't think they're monopoly on Flash is anything the industry is concerned about at this point.)

"Backroom deals with distributors"? No idea what the heck that means. What deal? What distributor? Resellers lost more than they gained with this changeover.

"Short term predatory pricing"? What's short-term? Prices have been basically where they are for a decade...(maybe that's what makes it so insidious and underhanded?)

Also...what products have they acquired to eliminate competition? they bought products to develop them...but it's not like they've purchased a competitor to Photoshop or Premiere Pro...or After Effects...and taken it off the market. They had no color finishing application that they were shielding by purchasing SpeedGrade...Serious Magic had no directly competitive products.

Establishing a monopoly through acquiring competition is not something that's remotely demonstrable...competition not being able to compete with features/price/or market penetration is not a crime.



"Over the usual product lifecycle the subscription pricing scheme is a 300% price increase for most customers who have no choice but to pay or be unable to work in their profession."

You can't create your own definition of "usual" for product life cycle as Adobe releases every year by recent trend...and that is what the product's "life cycle" is...and by that measure, the price isn't anywhere close to 300% of current pricing.


Complaints are one thing, but tossing around vague legal antitrust language with equally vague accusations is a ridiculous waste of time. The other petition that appeals directly to Adobe has a better chance of going somewhere toward your goal of sending a message.

I've heard many references among the protests to whatever Adobe "is smoking"...whatever it is, this petition to the POTUS was written by somebody smoking something far more potent.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Joseph W. Bourke
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 4:51:43 pm

That's what I was getting at Tim - you put it more directly...and honestly...

Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 5:11:37 pm

I'll add that the DoJ did investigate the Adobe / Macromedia deal (which isn't uncommon) and didn't see any potential anti-trust problems so they allowed it to go through.




Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 5:31:26 pm

Oh for crying in the mud! I'm not all that thrilled with the Creative Cloud perpetual software rental, but I think this lawsuit with the DOJ is downright frivolous. Let them do more important things, like try to prosecute banks for stealing our homes (or rather, look for ways to AVOID doing that since Wall Street owns them)...or prosecute real criminals.

This issue is getting sillier than the FCX debacle. Making that look tame in comparison.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Brandon Cordy
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 7:29:25 pm

Yeah, this passed the FCPX blow-up in size, scope, and ridiculousness a week ago.


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 8:23:46 pm

[Brandon Cordy] "Yeah, this passed the FCPX blow-up in size, scope, and ridiculousness a week ago."

Well there weren't any print and web designers affected by Final Cut Pro...this throws a pretty wide net.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Brandon Cordy
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 8:44:23 pm

This is true. Even so, I felt like the FCPX thing had a larger amount of legitimate concern (all of which should have been tempered, however, byt the fact that this was obviously unfinished software the same way Mac OS X 10.0.0 was unfinished).

I wasn't reading quite so many blatant non-factual statements/presumptions about FCPX as I am about Creative Cloud. People not approving of the pricing structure is fine, but the wrong math, the incorrect assumptions of how the stuff runs, etc...it's a lot.

I do remember being afraid to tell anyone for a while that I liked FCPX when I finally got to use it, ha ha.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 6:38:54 pm

would there be any possible way of convincing the justice department that adobe is, in fact, a conservative superpac dealing out a republican slushfund?

because then, you know, they might actually bite. Or failing that, try it with the IRS maybe.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 17, 2013 at 8:12:31 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "would there be any possible way of convincing the justice department that adobe is, in fact, a conservative superpac dealing out a republican slushfund?"

It sounds like you're a year late... :-)

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Cameron Clendaniel
Re: New petition directed to department of justice
on May 18, 2013 at 2:59:51 pm

This petition must be a joke

Cameron Clendaniel
Film Editor, NYC
718-254-8027
cam@camclendaniel.com
http://www.camclendaniel.com



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]