Adobe clarified its terms after an AI training scare

A terms update, then two clarifications

In February 2024, Adobe rolled out a routine re-acceptance of its Terms of Use, adding language the company later said reflected more human moderation of content for legal compliance. The wording alarmed customers, who read it as permission to train generative AI on their in-progress work. On 6 June 2024, Adobe published a clarification stating that it does not train Firefly generative models on customer content, relying instead on licensed material such as Adobe Stock and public-domain content, and that Adobe never assumes ownership of a customer's work. A follow-up post on 10 June 2024 committed to updated terms by 18 June 2024, listing five specific points: no generative-AI training on customer content, an opt-out from non-generative machine-learning product-improvement programs, narrower and more plainly explained content licences, no scanning of content stored locally, and automated scanning of uploaded content limited to detecting illegal material.

Who this affects, and the mechanism it describes

Every subscriber who must accept Adobe's terms to keep using its software is affected. The underlying mechanism separates three categories of content: local content on a device, which Adobe says it does not scan; cloud content that is uploaded or synced, which is scanned for illegal material and may be analysed in aggregate unless a user opts out; and Adobe Stock submissions, the one category Adobe says it may use to train generative models.

The friction: a promise, not a redline comparison

The June posts describe Adobe's intentions but do not, in the pages themselves, reproduce the original February wording alongside the revised text, so a reader cannot verify the exact legal change from the blog posts alone. Adobe's current Terms of Use, as retrieved on 16 September 2026 and carrying an effective date of 3 October 2025, still draws the same three-way distinction described in June 2024, which suggests the commitments have persisted through at least one further revision, though a living document is, by definition, subject to change again.

• Does the Terms of Use, as you read it today, still carry the no-generative-training language promised in June 2024?
• Do you have anything in cloud-synced storage that you would rather keep purely local?
• Have you actually checked whether you are opted in or out of the content-analytics program the terms describe?

A clarification is a company's account of its own intentions. It is useful evidence, but the terms page itself, read on the day that matters, is the document that actually governs.