On June 25, Adobe announced they are acquiring Topaz Labs.
If that happens, I’m ditching Topaz products entirely. I refuse to be enslaved by Adobe’s ecosystem, SaaS model, and impossible-to-cancel billing practices.
Topaz’s value to many of us is precisely that it is NOT Adobe. Inevitably, Adobe ownership eventually will mean Creative Cloud dependency, cloud-credit behavior, Premiere-first priorities (check the Tech preview, it’s already happening), forced integration, and eventual loss of independent local processing. This means the acquisition destroys the reason many of us use Topaz products in the first place.
Adobe’s reputation is not imaginary. The U.S. government recently brought action against Adobe over its subscription and cancellation practices, and Adobe agreed to a $150 million settlement package over allegations involving hidden termination fees and difficult cancellation processes. Adobe denied wrongdoing, as companies always do, but the enforcement record exists.
This is what Topaz is becoming part of now?!
Topaz users are being asked to believe that Adobe ownership will not eventually mean the ecosystem and billing lock-in I mentioned. A press-release promise that Topaz will “remain standalone” is not enough. That is not a contract. That is not a regulatory condition. That is posturing.
If this deal proceeds, Topaz cannot guarantee the above promise by contract with each and every one of us in a way that has any teeth. Once Adobe owns it, they can do whatever they want with no legal consequences. How is the above assurance supposed to actually mean anything?
The obvious outcome: Adobe will eventually Adobe-ify it.
And I am not paying for that. Once this happens, I’m gone.
Actually, there’s already a thread for this discussion - https://community.topazlabs.com/t/adobe-to-acquire-topaz-labs . It’s obvious that the amount offered to Topaz’s CEO completely covers all future sales risks; otherwise, no one would have agreed to it. So your protest is pointless and just falls on deaf ears.
Thanks for the link. I’m fine with this being merged into the existing thread if moderators prefer.
Yes — the deal may cover the CEO’s financial risk. That is exactly why users need to speak up. His risk is not our risk.
Us speaking up still matters because there’s still the issue of Adobe losing the added value of an established customer base. Lose us, and Topaz is just the model IP and a hollowed-out customer base and I’m willing to bet Adobe isn’t buying it for a write-off.
So no, public objection is not pointless. It is a signal about asset risk. Silence would imply users are fine with the acquisition and willing to follow Topaz into Adobe’s ecosystem. Many of us are not.
Maybe they listen. Maybe not. But pretending the CEO’s payout resolves the customer problem misses the entire point. I’m cancelling my subscription now, and going back to TVAI (perpetual), and I urge everyone to do the same until Adobe is in the rear view mirror.
I currently subscribe to Adobe Creative Cloud. For $10/month I can use Photoshop and Darkroom (plus a group of additional add-on products), both of which can run locally or in the cloud (the cloud versions even support my iPad). I have no problem with their practices.
I’m glad Adobe works for you, but your personal comfort with Creative Cloud does not answer the concern being raised here.
This is not about whether some users are satisfied with Adobe today. It is about whether Adobe acquiring Topaz creates risk for users who deliberately chose Topaz because it is not part of the Adobe ecosystem, or anyone else’s.
Adobe’s subscription practices are not just a matter of opinion or internet folklore. The U.S. government brought action over Adobe’s subscription and cancellation practices, and Adobe agreed to a $150 million settlement package while denying wrongdoing. That history is relevant when users are being asked to trust Adobe with another independent creative-software product.
So yes, Adobe may work fine for you. That does not make other users wrong for objecting to Adobe acquiring Topaz, especially if our concern is long-term standalone access, local processing, licensing, pricing, cancellation, and forced ecosystem dependence.
Just voicing my opinion, just as you have. I didn’t say or even imply that you were wrong, I simply stated that I’m not concerned. YMMV
If want a real argument, “users who deliberately chose Topaz because it is not part of the Adobe ecosystem, or anyone else’s” we’re dreaming. Topaz’s days as an independent company were numbered from the start. It serves a sizable niche, but it is a niche market. It was going to be acquired sooner or later, if not by Adobe, then by NVidia or Microsoft.
I just hope @kyle.topazlabs has some stock options…he deserves a payout!
I certainly hope it’s not that bleak. I would like to think a new tech company can innovate and retain its own independence on the long term. But in a way you may be right that it was bound to be bought up eventually. Very sad.
As i already wrote, I believe Adobe is the wrong partner, both strategically and ethically. From a financial perspective, the outlook is also increasingly negative. Over the past five years, Adobe’s stock has lost approximately 65% of its value.
