From: sobriquet <dohduhdah@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.55.203.200 with SMTP id u69mr1029344qkl.35.1513640329902;
Mon, 18 Dec 2017 15:38:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.31.171.73 with SMTP id u70mr129904vke.10.1513640329812; Mon,
18 Dec 2017 15:38:49 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m31no3579423qtf.0!news-out.google.com!v55ni1335qtc.0!nntp.google.com!m31no3579420qtf.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 15:38:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <f6jg3d1m0i3rtes3tmhtvgs68ul7a6jp12@4ax.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.148.91.183;
posting-account=Ft_AlwoAAACRFHaTvqHzRLGUJWp0fdpP
NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.148.91.183
References: <00942a15-c476-4273-9671-c1ef61328784@googlegroups.com>
<p0rg46$1tqe$1@gioia.aioe.org> <131220171132354803%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<d8ec4ebe-4153-448c-a71b-43f86105871c@googlegroups.com> <181220171608156123%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<e2bafadf-81f6-45a2-bd23-34a8dc0ed858@googlegroups.com> <p19er6$101g$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<f6jg3d1m0i3rtes3tmhtvgs68ul7a6jp12@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bc296953-3377-4faf-a3aa-c36a5f980b99@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
From: sobriquet <dohduhdah@yahoo.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 23:38:49 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 59
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 at 12:28:23 AM UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 17:17:00 -0500, "Mayayana"
><mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> 
> >"sobriquet"<dohduhdah@yahoo.com> wrote
> >
> >| I've been using pirated copies of photoshop for a long time
> >
> >  I wouldn't go around talking about it if I were you.
> >Though I wonder how much Adobe care. Like MS Office,
> >they make their money by pricegouging commercial
> >customers for an industry-standard product. For those
> >customers, the high cost of using Adobe pays for itself.
> >Most others are unlikely to use it. (Aside from a few
> >suckers like nospam who think the only way to edit
> >photos properly is to buy the very latest version of
> >PS.)
> >
> >  Another way of putting that: If you made money from
> >using PS then using it illegally wouldn't be worth the risk.
> >If you don't make money from it then you're not likely
> >to ever be an Adobe customer. I wouldn't be surprised
> >if a lot of college students use it illegally. And I wouldn't
> >be surprised if Adobe likes that. As Bill Gates once said
> >about China: "If they're going to steal software we'd
> >rather they steal our software. We'll get them to pay for
> >it later." 
> >
> 
> I don't make money out of Photoshop and for what it costs to rent CC I
> find I save money. I have several times said that for years I
> variously tried and used all kinds of image processing software in an
> attempt to achieve what could be done in PS. It had dawned on me just
> how much I was spending trying not to buy PS when PS CC came along.
> Now I've got it all in one compatible package and I will never
> willingly go back.
> 
> Soubriquet talks of 100,000 down loads but I wonder how many of them
> get to be used. I know several people who have tried bootleg PS and
> given it up because they couldn't understand it. I suspect that many
> of these downloads have been made simply because they could. 
> Then what ... ?

Well, people don't just download photoshop CC, they also
download tons of photoshop tutorials (lynda, vtc, pluralsight,
etc..) and then it's actually a lot of fun to learn using
photoshop (it doesn't cost you a penny, but it will take you quite
a while to familiarize yourself with the wide range of creative
possibilities in photoshop, illustrator, etc..).
Besides, many people who download a copy might share it with
friends, so the numbers of people using an unauthorized copy is
likely to be much bigger than the number of people fetching a
copy from p2p.

> -- 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Eric Stevens