Re: Photoshop Academic Edition

Sally Beacham wrote:

"Robert Burns" wrote in message

Can you later upgrade to the non-academic edition if you no longer qualify as a student or teacher?

Yes.

This makes one wonder. If you acquired the program legally while you were a student, can you then not legally continue to use it on your home PC/Mac after you have taken your exams and started working?

—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.coldsiberia.org/

"pioe[rmv]" <"pioe[rmv]"@coldsiberia.org> wrote in message

Sally Beacham wrote:

"Robert Burns" wrote in message

Can you later upgrade to the non-academic edition if you no longer

qualify

as a student or teacher?

Yes.

This makes one wonder. If you acquired the program legally while you were a student, can you then not legally continue to use it on your home PC/Mac after you have taken your exams and started working?

I think the rationale is – you purchase software at an academic discount while you are learning it. Once you become commercially viable, shall we say – that is, you are producing work that you get compensated for, then you should be buying a commercial license.

Soooooooooooooo…. can’t speak to the legality of using your academic version on your home computer, but I don’t believe your license to use it for academic purposes is revoked when you are no longer technically a student.

—
Sally Beacham / www.dizteq.com
www.lvsonline.com / PSP, Filter Frenzy, Xara X
FilterMunky / www.psppower.com
reply to sbeachamATdizteq.com

Glenn Pechacek wrote:

Soooooooooooooo…. can’t speak to the legality of using your academic version on your home computer, but I don’t believe your license to use it for academic purposes is revoked when you are no longer technically a student.

The academic version is subject to qualification at time of purchase, that’s about the only restriction as I understand.

That was my understanding too.

By definition, "home" should not be a "production environment" even if one happens to earn some money from what one is doing there. If the program was subsequently loaded and used on an employer’s machine at work it would presumably be different.

Anyone can confirm with certainty that it can be used at home for infinity after one has finished the studies? Surely Adobe will not drag you to court for software piracy if you use your program in your home. Or will they?

—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.coldsiberia.org/

Soooooooooooooo…. can’t speak to the legality of using your academic version on your home computer, but I don’t believe your license to use it for academic purposes is revoked when you are no longer technically a student.

The academic version is subject to qualification at time of purchase, that’s
about the only restriction as I understand.

That was my understanding too.

By definition, "home" should not be a "production environment" even if one happens to earn some money from what one is doing there. If the program was subsequently loaded and used on an employer’s machine at work it would presumably be different.

Anyone can confirm with certainty that it can be used at home for infinity after one has finished the studies? Surely Adobe will not drag you to court for software piracy if you use your program in your home. Or will they?

My understanding is that it’s not strictly home use, but rather non-commercial academic use. You should not use your academic license for any kind of commercial production, even if you are still a student.

From: 14.5 End User License Agreement, Photoshop 7.0.
"Educational Software Product Conditions. If the Software accompanying this Agreement is Educational Software Product (Software manufactured for distribution to Adobe’s educational channel), you are not entitled to Use the Software unless you qualify in your jurisdiction as an Educational End User…"

Actually there is a rather nice anomaly in the PS commercial license that might help all you commercial users, who also want to learn/expand your skill at home. Read the following:
http://www.adobe.com/support/salesdocs/2416.htm

—
Regards
Christopher Dillon
Onemouse .-‘
+—————————————— _|__–+
| One Man & His Mouse Design Consultancy / \ |
| |()_()| |
| Cambridge \{o o}/ |
| New Zealand =\o/= |
+—————————————— ^ ^ –+

Tom March wrote:

I got it
and registered it the same day.

It seems that they may give a lot of leeway, according to whether or not they believe you. Also as expected.

But what exactly is the purpose of registering a program? I have always bought my software, both Windows 2000, Word Perfect and Corel (do not use Adobe yet), but never registered anything. It seems that the software industry wants greater control over what people do with the software, even when people have paid for it. The latest is Adobe’s announcement that they are going to implement Product Activation. Not a problem for pirates who will always decompile and crack anything, but a major nuisance for honest users.

Now I wonder what is the right thing to do: Boycott Adobe because of their choice or hurry to buy a PS 7 copy without Product Activation so that I can have that for perpetuity, and so that my critical comments will carry more weight. If one can say that "I paid for my license" one might be listened to more than if one criticizes something one does not have – then it is easier to say "you just do not want to pay, and only therefore you are vocal about this."

What is the group’s take on Product Activation schemes that make the user dependent on the avsilability of the software manufacturer’s activation/registration services? Why would we accept such things any more than we would accept to use another tool that the manufacturer could effectively stop us from using at their discrimination?

Lastly, is Adobe Photoshop 7 a better photo editing program than Corel’s PhotoPaint and if so, why?

—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.alpha-gruppen.com/

"pioe[rmv]"@coldsiberia.org

wrote>

But what exactly is the purpose of registering a program? I have always bought my software, both Windows 2000, Word Perfect and Corel (do not use Adobe yet), but never registered anything. It seems that the software industry wants greater control over what people do with the software, even when people have paid for it. The latest is Adobe’s announcement that they are going to implement Product Activation. Not a problem for pirates who will always decompile and crack anything, but a major nuisance for honest users.

Now I wonder what is the right thing to do: Boycott Adobe because of their choice or hurry to buy a PS 7 copy without Product Activation so that I can have that for perpetuity, and so that my critical comments will carry more weight. If one can say that "I paid for my license" one might be listened to more than if one criticizes something one does not have – then it is easier to say "you just do not want to pay, and only therefore you are vocal about this."

What is the group’s take on Product Activation schemes that make the user dependent on the avsilability of the software manufacturer’s activation/registration services? Why would we accept such things any more than we would accept to use another tool that the manufacturer could effectively stop us from using at their discrimination?

If you don’t register it you won’t be able to get an upgrade without buying the whole thing

ARosenblat wrote:

If you don’t register it you won’t be able to get an upgrade without buying the whole thing

I probably won’t register, just on principle.

If I do upgrade, any use of the program version from which one upgraded will be illegal, or am I wrong?

Also, since Adobe plan to introduce Product Activation, upgrade to a crippled version that cannot ever be installed from scratch without "permission" is something that is not worth it if one values the integrity of one’s own computer.

http://www.pacific.adobe.com/activation/main.html

If everyone said "no" to this, they could not introduce it.

—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.alpha-gruppen.com/

Hecate wrote:

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 02:56:55 +0200, "pioe[rmv]" <"pioe[rmv]"@coldsiberia.org> wrote:

Lastly, is Adobe Photoshop 7 a better photo editing program than Corel’s PhotoPaint and if so, why?

Lots and lots of reasons. Photopaint is OK. I use it occasionally as it came with CorelDraw. And it is probably all a casual user needs. However, it doesn’t have the power or flexibility of PS. I have yet to find anything I cannot do in PS as far as raster images go. I have found some things I can’t do effectively in Photopaint or PSP for that matter.

Corel PhotoPaint has 16-bit color support, LAB color and Curves. That are the fundamentals. Programs that lack these things, like Photoshop Elements and Paint Shop Pro, are not suitable for any kind of photo editing. I have tested both the latter programs, and they are simply not sufficient even for an amateur photographer. One might assume that the professional illustrator needs the full power of Photoshop, but even a modest photo amateur will find that programs that cannot edit 16-bit files, convert to LAB or do Curves are not up to the task. You need these three things to obtain true quality results.

The capabilities of Photoshop are beyond doubt, so one cannot go wrong by buying it. (Of course, I had not expected to get any other advice on this group either, but it is nevertheless true.)

Basically, you’re not comparing like for like. Comparing Photopaint to Photoshop is like comparing a Ford Edsel to a modern Ford (or a Ford to a Ferrari for that matter <g>).

That may be a bit strong, but Photoshop is certainly good, so I went this way:

http://www.coldsiberia.org/public/IMG_1099_800.jpg

That also enables me to voice up against the restrictions Adobe wants to use in the coming versions.

(http://www.pacific.adobe.com/activation/main.html)

I can now demonstrate that I have no problems with paying, but then I want to run my program without need to get "permission" from anyone in order to install or re-install now, tomorrow or in sone years. On my one single very private machine, I have no problems with that either.

But Product Activation? No. We would all benefit from communicating that we do not want crippled software. Personally I would have gone to a combination of Filmgimp/Cinepaint and GIMP if Photoshop 7 had required Product Activation. The proprietary software companies are effectively encouraging Open Source by their increasing restrictions and limitations.

—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.alpha-gruppen.com/

You register your program to gain access to product support. Registering has absolutely nothing to do with upgrading and that includes the Academic version.

The only difference between the Academic and the standard version is first you have to be a teacher or student to purchase it. Any of the sites that sell it make you verify your academic status. Then there is an Academic version note in the start-up splash screen. After that the two versions ARE IDENTICAL. One caveat is that the program is not to be used in a profit making situation.

After that the Academic version can be upgraded just as easily as the standard. How do I know? Because I purchased Academic version 5.5 while in school. I have since upgraded to version 6 then 7 with NO PROBLEM.

If you have a legal version of PhotoShop with a legal serial number you can upgraded even if you have never registered the program. The program is NOT crippled if you don’t register.

"pioe[rmv]" <"pioe[rmv]"@coldsiberia.org> wrote in message

ARosenblat wrote:

If you don’t register it you won’t be able to get an upgrade without

buying the

whole thing

I probably won’t register, just on principle.

If I do upgrade, any use of the program version from which one upgraded will be illegal, or am I wrong?

Also, since Adobe plan to introduce Product Activation, upgrade to a crippled version that cannot ever be installed from scratch without "permission" is something that is not worth it if one values the integrity of one’s own computer.

http://www.pacific.adobe.com/activation/main.html

If everyone said "no" to this, they could not introduce it.
—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.alpha-gruppen.com/

NitroFishBlue wrote:

After that the two versions ARE
IDENTICAL. One caveat is that the program is not to be used in a profit making situation.

How do they define "a profit making situation"? Is it literally meant so that even if a private user do some film scans and take some money for it Adobe will take action, and if so, what action? What about a person who is not a professional illustator or photographer, but occasionally sells pictures or illustrations as a side activity?

After that the Academic version can be upgraded just as easily as the standard. How do I know? Because I purchased Academic version 5.5 while in school. I have since upgraded to version 6 then 7 with NO PROBLEM.

Fine, but now I have already bought the full version 7.0. I do not deplore it the least.

If you have a legal version of PhotoShop with a legal serial number you can upgraded even if you have never registered the program. The program is NOT crippled if you don’t register.

I know that much, but if you do upgrade do you not then lose the right to use the previous version from which you upgraded?

—
Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
http://www.alpha-gruppen.com/

NitroFishBlue wrote:

If you have a legal version of PhotoShop with a legal serial number you can

upgraded even if you have never registered the program. The program is NOT crippled if you don’t register.

Thanks for the clarification

pioe[rmv]"@coldsiberia.org

wrote:

I know that much, but if you do upgrade do you not then lose the right to use the previous version from which you upgraded?

I think not, because the serial number is still that of the original versions, not the upgrades. I have upgraded from 4 to 5 to 6 to 7