In response to recent backlash, Adobe has announced a revision to its terms of service agreement to clarify its policies regarding AI training on user content. The updated terms explicitly state that Adobe will not use user content stored locally or in the cloud to train generative AI, with the exception of content submitted to the Adobe Stock marketplace, which can be used to train Adobe Firefly.
Clearer Policies to Address User Concerns
Adobe’s revised terms now include distinct categories that outline the company's access to user content, with a specific section dedicated to generative AI. According to Scott Belsky, Adobe’s chief strategy officer, these clarifications do not represent a change in policy but rather a more explicit communication of existing practices. "We’ve explicitly said we will not train generative AI on your content,” Belsky explained in an interview with The Verge. “It was always a policy that we had as a company. We always made that very clear, but we never explicitly said that.”
Addressing NDA and Content Scanning Concerns
The new terms also address concerns about Adobe scanning content created under nondisclosure agreements (NDAs). Adobe assures users that it does not scan or review work stored locally on their devices. Content uploaded to the cloud will only be automatically scanned to ensure it does not contain illegal or abusive material, such as Child Sexual Abuse Material. Human review of cloud content will only occur if the content is flagged or reported as illegal, or if users opt into Adobe’s prerelease, beta, or product improvement programs.
Historical Frustrations Resurface
The controversy began earlier this month when users misinterpreted the changes in Adobe’s terms as giving the company permission to use their work for AI training. This misunderstanding sparked an outcry among creatives who have long been frustrated with Adobe’s dominant position in the creative industry. This frustration has also drawn the attention of the federal government, with the Department of Justice suing Adobe for allegedly hiding expensive cancellation fees and making it difficult for users to cancel their subscriptions.
Belsky acknowledged that user dissatisfaction dates back to Adobe’s shift to a subscription-only model in 2012. “I think that that was a change for some customers that probably rubbed them negatively,” he noted. “I think that when something like this [the terms of service update] happens, my observation is that we see a bit of a resurgence of that frustration. That may have been seeded back when we made that model change.”
Moving Forward
While Adobe’s efforts to clarify its terms of service are a step in the right direction, they may only serve as a temporary fix to deeper issues of trust and transparency. Rebuilding user trust will likely require more sustained efforts and openness from the company.
Komentar
Posting Komentar