Last week I wrote a news article about the launch of Adobe Photoshop and Premiere Elements 2025, detailing everything new in the software giant's annual update to its entry-level photo and video editing software. Well, almost everything…
You see, I initially missed a teeny-weeny detail that might just ruffle a few feathers. Namely, the introduction of a three-year license. If you buy Photoshop Elements 2025 (or Premiere Elements 2025), you do not own the software indefinitely. However, you will be able to access the Organiser.
As Adobe puts it… "The license is for a full 3-year term, with no monthly or annual recurring subscription fees required. The license is non-renewing — it expires 3 years after redemption, at which time the Editor will no longer be accessible, but the Organiser will continue to be accessible indefinitely."
Now, that's an important piece of information. For some, Adobe Elements' biggest selling point was the fact that you owned it. In a world where the flagship Photoshop and Premiere are only obtainable via a monthly Creative Cloud subscription, Elements presented an attractive one-time-purchase alternative as one of the best video editing software and one of the best photo editing software on the market.
My biggest criticism leveled at digital licenses and subscriptions is choice (or lack thereof). I'd certainly prefer to choose when I upgrade and if I'm forced to upgrade before I'm ready, I can't help but feel like I'm being prized away from my hard-earned prematurely.
On the plus side, three years is a long time when it comes to software. If I was still using Elements 2025 in 2028, I'm pretty sure I'd be eyeing up an upgrade. And I'm happy that the license is non-renewing. As a forgetful person, I loathe auto-renewals, so at least I can choose whether or not I, presumably purchase the latest edition of Adobe Elements, when my license runs out. But this lukewarm licensing model begs the question, why has Adobe felt the need to introduce such a tepid payment plan? I'm not sure how it stands to gain, but I'm not sure it stands to lose, either…
We live in a very different world from the one we did over a decade ago, when Adobe introduced Creative Cloud. Subscriptions are everywhere. Streaming services have taken over audio and visual entertainment, video game consoles are ditching disc drives, and be it razorblades or dog food, you can purchase a subscription for almost anything.
Whether it's a good thing or not, people are getting used to purchasing digital products in this way. Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of digital media – fitting for a web journo, eh? And the proof is in the physical pudding. I still buy Blu-rays. If you name a classic rock band, I've got at least one of their albums on CD or vinyl (or both). I own one of the best film cameras. I still buy books. And you better believe I opted for a PlayStation 5 with a disc drive!
But digital media is convenient and, of course, unavoidable. And one of the reasons I've warmed to digital licences and subscriptions over time is because I consider all digital purchases to be licences. I'm no lawyer, but check the T&Cs of any digital media 'one-time purchase' and you'll find plenty of ambiguity. Not to mention, strict instructions not to distribute said content. Heck, I've lost access to digital media I thought I owned and I'm sure you have, too.
Ultimately, Elements' three-year licence might just be a sign of the times. If you don't like it, you have other options such as the excellent Affinity Photo 2.
But remember, you never truly own a digital download.
