Adobe CS2 free!

Cool, I didn't say that at all and you didn't even read what I quoted.

 

Yes it does. Because it is not an official statement. This guy is not the press man of Adobe. His blog not the official press board. That`s his personal opinion. Stated BEFORE Adobe then has finally put CS2 in front of the door. When this guy made his inofficial statement you still needed to log in to download CS2.

Again i have to talk about law. There`s not a single step illegal at the moment to download and run CS2.

 

No it is not just a simple personal opinion. It is a response from Adobe's product manager and not from one of Adobe's cleaning ladies, along with a statement on Adobe's official blog and the unambiguous wording at the japanese site. What do you expect? That Adobe's CEO writes you a personal E-mail?

You can freely download the suite together with the serial. So far so good. But you don't have a proper license given from Adobe to use it.

The thing is, Adobe simple tolerates it. And it is unlikely that they're going to take legal action against everyone who downloaded it. You apparently confuse this with the assumption that it's legal, Which is obviously not.

 

Yes it is a simple personal opinion. A personal blog of an employee, and be it the president itself, is not the press board. Period.

Anyways. This is completely irrelevant. We talk about law here. And by law you have to label your products in a proper way. So even IF Adobe would really have made an official statement at his press board, the download page still lacks of this information. And the download page is still publically available.

I as a user am not forced to do days and weeks of researches through dozens of magazines just to find the one statement that says if i can use or not use a software. It`s the job of the companies to provide me the needed informations, and to protect their software from illegal downloads.

I have to repeat the offer. Try to sue me. That`s the only valid way to convince you it seems

 

There. Fixed that for you.

 

What?

 

Ah, you want me to name the exact paragraphs.Try to sue me. Then you will find out the correct paragraphs by yourself

 

You have a interesting conception about the way how these things works. And you trying really hard to put a slant on this one.

But once again. It is not just about the download. It is about the license which comes along with the purchase of such software. Simple question. Do you own a proper license of CS2? No? Then you can't use it unless Adobe give you the permission. Easy accessible download, or not. That makes no difference.

And as I said, when you're rely that hard on official statements, please show me where Adobe officially says, they give everyone a free license for CS2?

You shout always for an evidence, that shows you that this is actually not legal.
And yet, you still owe us a source, that says it is legal and backs up your claims. I guess that's what MarigoldFleur meant with her post.

Furthermore, you deny Adobe's product manager as a valid source of information, our Adobes official statement on the blog etc. But at the same time, you're confident, that this is legal because some german PC magazines (absolutely not affiliated with Adobe) link it. That makes sense...

^Frankly dude, this is ridiculous.
I gotta get out of this discussion now because we arguing in circles here.

Since you exposed yourself as someone that downloaded the software, it is quite understandable that you won't acknowledge this in a public forum and that you try to pass the buck to Adobe. Maybe I'd do the same if I woudln't already own CS6.

 

I suppose nothing would stop you from buying a legit version second hand from someone, how would you know if it is fake?

 

Can we agree you guys disagree ? This is the second or third page that you are using the same arguments. I totally and honestly understand both of your points of view but it seems that we will have to wait for some official official official statement, if there ever shall be one, hopefully. Because this is not leading anywhere atm, so can we just be friends again, yes please ?

 

I said I won't step into this discussion again, because we arguing in circles here

 

If it were that easy. Every once in a while I look for a second hand version, but never find anything usable. Whenever I found something, I saw in the comments-section of the seller, that the product could not be registered on Adobe (I am talking of e.g. CS5 here), thereby hinting it's most likely an illegal copy.

The funny thing is: once a new CS is released - all out of a sudden any previous versions aren't available anymore. Not even on Amazon. So you don't even get the chance to purchase an older version for less money. Kinda ridiculous...

 

But you nevertheless jump onto the boat again and again, always reintroducing the same already as invalid proven sources. Interesting, isn`t it?

Indeed. It`s called law. Odd thing this!

You ask for further sources? Why should i spend the time to do researches to give you the right paragraphs and correct laws too as long as you use dubious press sources from unknown magazines that relies at ttwo rare inofficial statements of an adobe housekeepers (employee) and a cleaner (forum mod) as official sources?

I already named you one of the laws that takes place here. It`s the competition law. Another possible case could be scam in case they would try to sue me for downloading and using CS2. The software is not declared as not free. And the software is freely available.

And there is still an official statement of Adobe missing

Yes. Because i have downloaded freeware that has no visible restrictions.

Definitely

But yeah, let`s go in circles

 

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

Seems so.

Maybe because you live in another country and your laws are a bit different here and there?

 

You haven't even pointed out your "laws" in the first place.

 

I got interested in this as a Web Developer, since designers mistakenly send us PSD format documents, which we kinda can open with Gimp, but often it breaks the design.

@nipoco Tiles
You both argue from the wrong angle. The installer is free, you both agree on that, right? Software licensing is done by writing the terms in installers or programs. So I don't think it even matters what some official figure says about a software the terms of which are the same old ones. You have to look at the terms written in the installer.

I skimmed through the license agreement and found point 13.

How can anyone comply with this if they don't have a license and therefore would be unable to validate the use of this software? They can't.

Afterwards comes provisions and exceptions, which I don't have time to read.

 

Indeed.

Registration servers are down anyways. There is no way to register your product anymore. No way to check for adobe. The only left way to activate your software is to use the license key that is attached. And that`s the only valid thing that is left.

Really? In germany it`s called Wettbewerbsrecht, free translated competition law, which i mentioned more than once. This law contains everything that has to do with business.

 

Doesn't the purchase receipt also include a license in a form other than activation?

 

Oh don't you run away, post deleter. nipoco?

The underlined is not true, since the license agreement talks about a license to use the product. The word "purchase" comes up in sections of "No transfer"(Copying and use in other computers), "Warranty"(which is void since December last year) and other places as in "proof of purchase".

If section 13. cannot be enforced or Adobe says that they will not enforce it, then yes.

Wait a minute...

Does this mean a user is given a license to use the software, if it is taken freely from Adobe's official website? Seems like it. Surely this is enough for section 13. Still I'm no lawyer, so it would still be better to consult one beforehand in case we miss something.

 

I did not run away. But the discussion is tiresome and adds nothing more than useless heat on both sides. And a little while after I wrote that I realized that my post won't make it any better. So I deleted it Not sure how you can quote that after more than 12 hours I deleted that?

Anyway. None of us is a lawyer. And all that stuff here are pure assumptions. From me, from Reiner and from you. At the end everyone can put their own view on that matter. Some think it is legal, others not. But does it really matter? You can download it and Adobe does nothing. Legal, or not. They obviously don't care that much.
Otherwise as Tiles said they would clearly say it is not legal on their official blog. And if Adobes product manager is enough to clear that out might be questionable. As well as some german magazines who link it.

I think it is better to use our valuable time for better things than discussing about stuff that not that much matter. It's just software. Who cares? Even Adobe does not.
We are here because we love creating games. Not to discuss stuff to death. I regret that whole discussion and I learned a valuable lesson out of that.

And really, I don't care who is right now. If Reiner is right fine. If not also fine.

Cheers!

 

Yeah, basically if you can prove you obtained this copy legally from Adobe within the timeframe they offered it for free - although it was not intended to be a free giveaway - they can do nothing against it if you look strictly at the license terms written black on white. It even complies with Section 13. It's a mistake on their part.
If they had written the line "only allowed for licensees which obtained a legal copy of photoshop before date xy" on their website it would have been enough (even though it would be a free download). But they didn't.

Therefore if can you prove, that you obtained the copy of Photoshop in the timeframe it was freely available and where Adobe was too lazy to add precise downloading conditions, they can do nothing much against you. I don't know how you can prove that though... by taking a screenshot of the download date? By using the "created date" in the windows folder listing?

It still feels wrong though... because it was definitely not intended to be a free giveaway. But in comparison e.g. if you kill someone in accident, but didn't intend to do it, it doesn't change the fact, that someone was killed by you. The mistake has happened and there are consequences, one must cope with.

 

@nipoco
I subscribed to the thread.

While writing that post I wanted a Adobe costumer like yourself, explain how or in what way do you get a license. If it just activation through an online service and that is the same as was done 7 years ago then section 13. cannot be enforced. But skimming through the license it seemed customers get something more, but when I spotted section 2., it no longer mattered.

I just think if I found some small holes in the license agreement then lawyers themselves would get more interested in finding out if it really is free, without needing to pay them.

But your view that products or ideas need to be labeled as free or non-free in order to be either is wrong. Here let's take an example. I'm making a up a word "gsvcpofdfglskdjfkl", this word is either free or not free for anyone to use. Is this word free to use? Yes because you won't find it on google and it is not reserved by any lawmaking institution.

Cheers.

@Ricks
I believe Adobe saw some hole already, that is why they said "While this might be interpreted as Adobe giving away software for free..."(which they didn't deny), because any downloader becomes a licensee by section 2 of the agreement.

 

Hahaha! Was it so entertaining that you subscribed to that, or are you simply interested in that legal stuff ??

To answer your question. Yes, I activated my license online. Bought it directly in Adobe's online store.

I agree, there might be some loopholes in that whole license and Adobe can't, or simply doesn't want to do anything. Though, they obviously don't intended to give it away for free. But they opened Pandora's box with that mess. I guess that is something we can all agree at least.

If this is wrong from an ethical standpoint to download it nonetheless, is something I won't judge. That is up to every individual. At least it doesn't harm anyone. For Adobe it's not a big loss I'd say.

Cheers!

 

Adobe and AutoDesk have one thing in common, heavy protection of their file formats to the point of lacking a free or cheap file converters, and making their old software versions illegal for selling. It is the reason I have a certain dislike for both of those companies. I would love for Adobe to release CS2 freely, if they haven't done so already since December 13(depends on what lawyers see). It would be a very cheap marketing strategy.

 

I don't like both companies either. But for Photoshop they is not a single alternative that would be good enough for my needs (painting, vector tools, video editing). Autodesk however is something I can fortunately avoid, since there are dozens of free, or cheaper solutions to AD's counterpart software.

Regarding to Adobe. I highly doubt there will any further statements to CS2 (as John Nack already pointed out). So it will remain a grey area, which everyone is entitled to see it to it's own liking.

 

Well rather than making a great PR move, Adobe updated the download page, also adding the following sentence:

http://www.adobe.com/downloads/cs2_downloads/index.html

I have to turn to English Native speakers of whenever "should" is sometimes equal to "must".

 

I can't believe it. I truly despise Adobe for the way they treat their clients (and some of their softwares), but this is ridiculous. They obviously want people to jump on their softwares by giving away older versions for free - "obviously" because otherwise they would've been immensely more clear when phrasing who could download what etc - but they want to do it without admitting they're giving away stuff for free, so they can always take it back. Disgusting, but doesn't surprise me at all coming from them.

 

It's as cristal clear as before

 

I just stumbled across a thread at Blender artist's where someone pointed to the german CS2 download site here.

It says:

I have no clue since when this was introduced there, but it says really clear that the download and usage of this software is prohibited for everyone who doesn't purchased CS2 in the past. Otherwise it is a violation of Adobe's Copyrights.

This should be relevant for Tiles, because he complained about a lack of a clear statement on the german download site.

Cheers!

 

Unfortunately, he is the same view as before.

 

Both Autodesk and Adobe have freely available SDKs and there are plenty file format converters for photoshop's PSD (indeed many art applications can read PSDs just fine). And Autodesk's FBX...well, you're using it! I've got my own grudges against both companies, but they're not because they don't make their old software free. FWIW, I think it would be good for Adobe to release CS2 into the wild...just not for the same reasons.

 

Huh? What do you mean?