First it was Google.. now its Adobe tracking you!

Ok, i came up with this theory a few years ago - when i was using a version of Adobe 5.0 i think - that adobe know who's pirated their software through images uploaded to the web.

No one knows - unless you monitor the 'registry' or file writes what Adobe Photoshop does when it installs on your computer.

Could it not check your e-mail address used by outlook, perhaps get your MAC address off your network card - of course storing this information alongside the user details of pirated 'photoshop' license keys.

now you'd go and save a JPG or GIF and upload it to your website right?

Wouldn't it be cool if your e-mail, MAC address and license were encrypted and stored in the JPG or GIF file itself? Then you'd have an 'adobe bot' (you know - like google bot that scans the web) that downloads all images to its servers and scans them to see it they were created with adobe products? of course - reading the encrypted data that has your E-mail, MAC Address and what license key was used?

like an invisible water mark!!!

they got ya now don't they?

could be the same for the older macromedia software? would a SWF or FLA file have this data stored in its contents.

you know this is all hypothetical, but i don't see why it cannot be done, and i'm sure there's stuff going on with our software that updates all the time that we have no idea about. i mean - do i really need Microsoft to allocate 20% of my bandwidth on an XP copy dedicated to Microsoft Updates? no.

It's certainly plausible, but consider the outcry over invasion of privacy.

I wouldn't put it past MSloth to do something like this, and, in fact, I wonder if they're scanning my PC when they upload 'updates' like every freakin' day

I don't use pirated stuff, nor pirate anything, so I'm not worried, but it might be good to have a second PC that you do not have linked up to the Web.

Just do your work on that PC, using whatever you want, and then connect via a cable or intranet to move a project to your 'net PC.

It's true that watermarks would still be on the file. You could probably argue that someone took your original image and re-edited it, and used unregistered software which put the mark in it. (then they'd have to remove the old MAC and put in the new MAC to prevent this, or multiple MACs)

Also think of th gazillions of images. They'd be employing a full time staff to do this - a costly venture.

But point taken - in the future we'll all have CPU chips with a registered number in them and anything we say or do will be monitored.

Up until now, the 'Uber Dweebs' have always been ahead of the drones at large companies and they catch this stuff and out it.

Good post

Dis you know that Xerox color printers (laser) and other brands print a pattern of color (yellow) dots that, give away the customer of the Printer?

And in the case of Adobe, now they need you to reconfirm the serial number of your software with your data to make the licence work, so basically they have all your info (if you ar e legal, in case of pirated copies, Iwouldnt think is too far out to say they can get you IF THEY WANT.

Originally posted by kix
Dis you know that Xerox color printers (laser) and other brands print a pattern of color (yellow) dots that, give away the customer of the Printer?

This has probably been put into place by the Treasury to discourage photo-reproduction of currency.

And in the case of Adobe, now they need you to reconfirm the serial number of your software with your data to make the licence work, so basically they have all your info (if you ar e legal, in case of pirated copies, Iwouldnt think is too far out to say they can get you IF THEY WANT.

Can you explain this further?

Do you mean that when you purchase copy of their SW that you put the serial in it off the box and then it 'phones home' also, and you have to re-confirm over the web?