"The current behavior aligns with expectations"
Umm....Who's expectations? Looking at the forum post it seems like no one knew about this until they hit the "new" limit.
By @scottp-acmevnt
FYI: You're answering to me, but citing Liza.
I say "new" becuase I wasn't even aware that there was a limit before(...)
By @scottp-acmevnt
You weren't aware because you did not hit the limit. Now you hit the limit.
As a business user, it is baffeling as to why Adobe would make changes that could likley affect business workflows with zero notice.
By @scottp-acmevnt
I agree that the limit should be documented. But if you are a business user, relying on free services, you know well, that there is no contractual obligation to Adobe to tell you about this change. It would have been polite to do so, however.
If we can get an email everytime the pricavy policy updates, (...)
By @scottp-acmevnt
You know well, that there are legal obligations for this, and even sometimes, privacy policy updates are imposed by legal changes.
As a business user, it is baffeling as to why Adobe would make changes that could likley affect business workflows with zero notice. (...) surely you can let us know ahead of time that there would be significant changes to the way free stock photos work to allow us to make plans ahead of time, insted of having to scrabel at the last minuite to figure out what is going on and how to resolve the situation.
By @scottp-acmevnt
As a business user, you know well, that the for-free-assets are appetizers for you to take a subscription, not to get your business relying on this. There are for-free alternatives, but not with the same legal protections. You may or you may not use those services. You may also use competitor services if they serve you better. Or you could take a subscription. It appears that those having a subscription are not hit by this limit. I just checked, and I could licence more than 3 free assets, without loosing credits.
ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
