Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id s4mr3779615qkd.45.1513744283532;
Tue, 19 Dec 2017 20:31:23 -0800 (PST)
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 23:31:09 -0500
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
<p0rg46$1tqe$> <131220171132354803%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<p19er6$101g$> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Received-Bytes: 4182
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3521460082
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Print Article
Forward Article
On 12/18/2017 6:38 PM, sobriquet wrote:
> 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"<> 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.

Interesting that you mention I and several thousnad that live 
in my library district,  get it free through our local library. I know I 
know it's not really free, but it's nice to see my taxes being spent on 
things I actually use.