Register | Login | |||||
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
| |
0 users currently in Craziness Domain. |
User | Post |
HyperHacker Posts: 4744/5072 |
Photoshop does have annoying bugs (hello when I click the buttons to change selection modes I want the selection mode to change), just not major ones.
Originally posted by BooUrns Owned. |
neotransotaku Posts: 1844/1860 |
Originally posted by Tarale There is this article from CNet that suggests that Google sides with Adobe... |
Cynthia Posts: 5610/5814 |
Heh... honestly, if I posted those terms on a site and Adobe e-mailed me and demanded I change the terms, I'd ignore them and nothing would happen.
It's Adobe's own damn fault that the program got popular, they should have slacked off on it and introduced major bugs. |
Tarale Posts: 2574/2713 |
Hahaha, this is funny.
I find it interesting that it is a positive thing for Google that the word "Google" has become a verb -- but Adobe consider it a negative thing for Photoshop to be used similarly. The term "to google" something has fairly likely lead to more people using the Google search engine.... |
BooUrns Posts: 251/450 |
Looks like even Adobe's employees don't follow the rules.
Originally posted by the Adobe support site Trademarks are proper adjectives and should be followed by the generic terms they describe. Trademarks must never be used in possessive form. |
Kyoufu Kawa Posts: 1329/1353 |
Originally posted by AilureBut only if you mean "to search for stuff using Google", so you can't use, say, AltaVista to google crap. |
Ailure Posts: 2416/2602 |
Originally posted by AliceMac's are much of a PC as the IBM compatible clones are. And of course, you can't enforce how people speak. At least Google doesn't seem to mind when you use their trademarks as verbs. :p |
FreeDOS + Posts: 1168/1312 |
At least Adobe has a better trademark than, say, Microsoft. Every time the courts start to question MS' trademarks like Office, Word, Windows, SQL Server, etc, Microsoft backs out of whatever the original case was anyway (usually about trademarks). Actually it's kind of funny. |
C`aos Posts: 287/311 |
Originally posted by Alice This sounds like a challenge! |
HyperHacker Posts: 4741/5072 |
Originally posted by emceeOriginally posted by Alice Probably, but I'd expect them to actually say "personal computer" in that case. I mean, they seem to make a point of bloating these as much as possible so you won't bother to read them. |
Skreename Posts: 1405/1427 |
Originally posted by asdfOriginally posted by Milly I think they're only doing that to prevent it entering the language as a normal word, like xerox. They won't actually sue anyone, much less for nontrivial damages. |
emcee Posts: 805/867 |
Originally posted by Alice I think they mean personal computer. |
asdf Posts: 4063/4077 |
Originally posted by Milly Especially considering the ® symbol is a non-standard key on a keyboard. Hell, out of everyone in the world, I honestly believe that only people who have to deal with the program in a legal contest seriously use it the so-called "proper" way. In fact, I think that their insisting that we type it the proper way is just an advertising scheme or something. At any rate, it's stupid, ridiculous, and an idle threat. Hell, it's probably laughable in the courtroom. |
HyperHacker Posts: 4734/5072 |
I've noticed some licenses say silly things like "you do not have to agree to this license, since you have not signed anything" when right on the license window itself it says "you must accept the license to use the software". Some of these are absolutely ridiculous. Some nice ones from Flash Player 7:
So you're allowed to use it on Mac OS, as long as it's running on a PC. (This was of course before this was possible.)
Because so many life support systems and nuclear bombs need to have Flash installed on them.
You can't sue for any more than what you paid for the free software. Why don't they just come right out and make the entire document "YOU AGREE NOT TO SUE"? |
Milly Posts: 138/145 |
INCORRECT: The image was manipulated using Photoshop. If they seriously expect everyone to type "Adobe® Photoshop®" everytime, that's going a bit far indeed So if I wanted to say this: "One of the photoshoppers here should use Photoshop to photoshop that damn thing with PS's features, then it'd be photoshopped" and had to follow those rules, it'd become like this: "One of those who use Adobe® Photoshop® software to manipulate images here should use Adobe® Photoshop® to enhance that damn thing using Adobe® Photoshop® software with Adobe® Photoshop®'s features, then it'd be enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software" Maybe not the best example, but it's still silly ... it could make sense for formal writing but not everyday chat |
C`aos Posts: 285/311 |
If they want their brand recognition so badly they can just call it Adobeshop, that's what I've always thought. |
Dr_Death16 Posts: 841/970 |
From the "Adobe Systems Incorporated Terms of Use" http://www.adobe.com/misc/trade.html
Do you own Photoshop? If so, you're probably guilty of violating their idiotic restrictions in the user license. Observe: Originally posted by AdobeI realize it is not just Adobe that does this sort of thing, but it is a good example of the lengths companies go in these licenses. |