Home / News / Software News / Adobe sues Forever 21 for pirating Photoshop

Adobe sues Forever 21 for pirating Photoshop


Forever 21 logo

Adobe has filed a lawsuit against clothing retailer Forever 21, alleging that the company has been prolifically pirating software.

According to the suit, filed yesterday at California District Court, Forever 21 acquired Adobe software illicitly on at least 63 counts.

The list of programs included, amongst others, Photoshop, Acrobat, and Illustrator.

Autodesk and Corel also joined Adobe in the suit, over allegations that Forever 21 also pirated Autodesk, WinZip, and PaintShopPro.

But wait, it gets worse – the suit specifically describes how Forever 21 ‘continued their infringing activities even after being contacted by Adobe regarding the infringement’.

There’s currently no telling how Adobe managed to learn of Forever 21’s software indiscretions – that may come to light in court – but an obvious conclusion would be that an insider blew the whistle.

Related: Apple, Google, Intel, Adobe settlement outed at $415 million

So detailed is the suit that Adobe has even provided specific registration numbers and download dates for each instance of software piracy.

Adobe described Forever 21’s actions as ‘willful, intentional, and malicious copyright infringement’.

The software company has asked courts to issue an injunction against Forever 21, as well as demanding compensation for any revenue lost, as well as the recoupment of court costs and additional damages.

We’ve reached out to both Forever 21 and Adobe for comment on this matter, and will update this article should they respond.


January 30, 2015, 11:31 am

"We’ve reached out"
Has Trusted Reviews gone American? This is a truly horrible phrase.


January 31, 2015, 10:45 am

I absolutely agree with Greg. This is execrable, truly lamentable. The Americans will use a phrase, concocted to sound important or corporate or some other spurious notion, where English, especially Anglo-Saxon English, has a single word. The best example of this overblown pomposity is 'at this moment in time' for 'now'.

What was wrong with 'contacted'?


February 2, 2015, 11:28 am

Its an interesting debate, grizzledraver. You have a point there, but I don't wholly agree. "Reached out to" does have a connotation that "contacted" doesn't. It feels more personable, as if the companies involved would be more likely to divulge more details than if they were merely "contacted". Its a more colourful phrase, almost anthropomorphic. When I first read it (in another tech site) I can't deny that it brought a smile to my face.


February 2, 2015, 3:36 pm

" 'Reached out to' does have a connotation that 'contacted' doesn't."

This is true. A good example is a comment by Lewis Hamilton in connection with his new deal with Merc GP. He is negotiating this all by himself, having dispensed with his management team but he did say that if he needs help he knows he can "reach out" to trusted people for advice.

He has used this in the sense that someone "reaches out" to others in time of need - if you fell through thin ice on a lake, you would indeed need to reach out. This meaning should be borne in mind by anyone tempted to use this phrase. But as a synonym for 'contacted' it is pure pretentiousness.


February 2, 2015, 5:55 pm

I think perhaps your description of this is a little over the top, but I agree "contacted" and "reached out" do have different meanings. However, I do not think they are a separate as you seem to suggest and it's a matter of personal preference as opposed to being "truly lamentable". In a way we did reach out for help with the article in the form of a response.

When writers have to write the same sentence again and again they sometimes like to change it so it doesn't feel like a stock line at the end of every news article.

comments powered by Disqus