Adobe gets destroyed by open source clone: here's the legal trouble I predict into the future

Summary

Louis Rossmann argues that open-source, AI-assisted alternatives to Adobe software could challenge Adobe’s subscription model—and potentially prompt a legal and lobbying response from software companies.

Adobe policies and customer complaints

Rossmann says Adobe’s 2022 terms allowed machine-learning analysis of users’ content, and a 2024 terms update permitted automated and manual access. He criticizes the lack of an opt-out for users who needed to regain access to their files, as well as Adobe’s subscription pricing and difficult cancellation process. He also cites a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit alleging hidden early-termination fees and intentionally difficult cancellations.

AI-generated alternatives

Rossmann describes Brandon Thomas’s open-source project, Artcraft, as a set of alternatives to Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Lightroom, After Effects, InDesign, and Acrobat. Thomas reportedly used Anthropic’s Claude Opus model. Rossmann views the project as an example of AI lowering the technical barrier to building replacement software.

He also describes using Claude to recreate a tool he relied on after its price rose and its paid version developed problems.

Reverse engineering and interoperability

Adobe’s terms, as Rossmann describes them, prohibit reverse engineering and attempts to recreate its products. He contrasts this with legal protections and court decisions that have allowed some reverse engineering or copying for purposes such as interoperability and fair use. He cites Sega v. Accolade, Lotus v. Borland, and the Supreme Court’s Google v. Oracle decision, while noting that the latter was decided on fair-use grounds rather than by settling whether APIs are copyrightable.

Possible legal and policy changes

Rossmann predicts that software companies may seek stronger restrictions on reverse engineering, software patents, design protections, or licensing rules that require makers of compatible software to pay fees. He warns that such changes could affect free alternatives such as LibreOffice and OpenOffice when they work with Microsoft document formats.

He also points to international copyright discussions and possible changes to anti-circumvention rules as avenues companies could pursue.

Repair and consumer rights

Rossmann supports using reverse engineering—including AI assistance—to restore features, preserve interoperability, or remove restrictions in products people have bought. He gives an exercise bike whose update reportedly blocked third-party apps as an example, and mentions the Fulu Foundation’s efforts to expand exemptions for repair and other uses of devices.

Reviews, guides, or tutorials

The video is commentary and legal-policy analysis; it does not provide a hands-on software review or a step-by-step tutorial.

Main speaker and sources

The main speaker is Louis Rossmann. He discusses work by Brandon Thomas and refers to Adobe’s terms, the Justice Department’s Adobe case, U.S. court decisions, DMCA provisions, proposed legislation, international copyright discussions, and the Fulu Foundation.