From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Full headers:
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 16:08:15 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <181220171608156123%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <> <p0rg46$1tqe$> <131220171132354803%nospam@nospam.invalid> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="62155e7a520401589e5c43e56103baeb";
logging-data="27812"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ya4JgrZvHkGGWiuvqhHqX"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2QjgI3P/svVTwIHDG6l0xm8nyCI=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article<>,
sobriquet<> wrote:

> > in other words, you are advocating pirating software, just as you do
> > with images taken from other web sites.
> > 
> > photoshop was one of the most pirated apps, if not *the* most pirated
> > app, along with other adobe software, which is why adobe moved to
> > activation over a decade ago and a major reason why they currently only
> > offer it as subscription. while not impossible, it's *much* harder to
> > pirate now.
> How is it *much* harder?!

because it periodically pings adobe's servers to verify, versus
supplying a valid serial one time.

> It's as easy as ever to pirate software, including
> photoshop CC.

no it isn't.

that doesn't mean it's impossible, just that it's harder than it used
to be.