[moolcool]

I'm sorry, but this is just mental gymnastics to justify dark patterns in modern software development and distribution. If I create a file on Photoshop on Monday, I should be able to open it on Friday. Period. Even if I used a feature I used "wasn't meant for me", as if that matters.

This is like pushing a firmware update to DVD players that makes certain disks unreadable. "Actually Grandma, your DVDs aren't corrupted. There's just a licensing dispute between Technicolor and the DVD standards consortium, making your existing tools no longer up to the task. The data is all still there on the discs!"

[cptskippy]

How should Adobe handle it?

Pantone support is a neglected feature that Adobe thinks most people should not be using.

* Do you pop up a UI saying "hey you're using it wrong, convert it" then run the risk that a user needs Pantone support and accidentally converts their files from Pantone and doesn't have a back up?

* Do you automatically convert their files and run the risk of getting sued when the user discovers the change?

* Do you automatically charge their Adobe account $10 and render the colors using Pantone?

* Do you eat the $10 for each user on the off chance they need Pantone?

* Do you eat the $10 only if a user ever opens a Pantone format file? The following week Pantone releases some asset free to everyone in Pantone format to boost their quarterly revenue?

They chose an option that makes it apparent to the user that there's a problem they need to resolve without embedding any controversy in their App or potentially harming user's file.

[moolcool]

They could simply not offer features which count on variable third party licensing terms.

[cptskippy]

So you're suggesting they do what they did?

Pantone support has been in their products for 30 years and only recently did Pantone start asking for money.

[moolcool]

No. I'm suggesting they do literally the opposite. They did, by definition, count on variable licensing terms.

[cptskippy]

I don't follow you, could you explain what you mean?

Historically Pantone has not charged a fee for Adobe to map the Pantone colorspace because it was advantageous for Pantone to not do so. The rationale being that the more widely available the Palette, the more likely it is to be used in print products.

Today Pantone has decided that it no longer wishes for that information to be shared freely and has compelled Adobe to stop mapping the colorspace by requiring they pay an outrageous per-user fee to do so.

Adobe recognizes that the overwhelming majority of it's users do not need Pantone, even if they're inadvertently or mistakenly using it. So they are unwilling to pay a per-user fee to enable a feature only a small subset of their users actually need.