Free Photoshop and Adobe clones: the open-source threat to subscriptions
Open-source clones of Photoshop and other Adobe apps are multiplying on GitHub. The subscription model and software legal protection are under scrutiny.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Free Photoshop clones put Adobe's business on the ropes
In October 2026, an engineer from Atlanta named Brandon Thomas published on GitHub a set of open-source replicas of seven Adobe applications —Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Lightroom, Acrobat Pro, After Effects and InDesign— developed, according to his account, with the help of Claude Opus 5.5. The project has racked up 44,000 stars and updates every three days. It can be downloaded for free for Linux, Windows and Mac. The US software industry accounts for around 9.3% of the country's GDP, according to figures cited in the discussion, and the movement has already spread to Office (WordCraft, GridCraft, DeckCraft), AutoCAD (cadCraft) and Figma (Figcraft).
The trigger is not classic piracy. The argument gaining the most traction is that Adobe's code was not copied, but that an AI programmed from scratch a piece of software that does the same thing with new code. "It's completely legal," one strand of the analysis maintains, comparing the case to Red Hat and Linux: the business model changes, the product is not stolen. Reverse engineering of antiestéticatures, they add, is not the same as copying the source code.
What the law says and what a judge thinks
The legal objection has not gone away. Some point out that whether it is a copy is decided by a judge, not by the enthusiast's judgment, and that the interface may also be protected. The answer that prevails in the conversation is practical: with 20,000 possible clones and the code already free, every lawsuit would take years and, before a court ruled, another version with a changed look would already be out. US jurisdiction, moreover, would not reach clones produced and distributed from other jurisdictions.
The subscription model in the crosshairs
Adobe's business rests on the monthly subscription and cancellation penalties. That is the flank the discussion identifies as vulnerable: mid-sized companies that cannot pirate because of audits and that would now have a legal, free alternative. The calculation that keeps coming up is savings of tens of thousands of euros a year per license. The question is whether the average boss waits until the clone is mature or whether the savings outweigh the risk of debugging young software.
Quality, the argument that holds it back
The enthusiasm has a brake. An open-source clone needs someone who knows how to program to debug it, and nobody massively adopts a tool that fails. Figcraft, the Figma replica, estimates itself at 53% antiestéticature parity and lacks the commercial plugin ecosystem. The discussion splits between those who see the end of closed software and those who believe this only opens the floodgates to experimental projects without the quality of the original.
Getty, the layoffs and the domino effect
The movement does not stop at Adobe. According to a message circulating in the thread, Getty Images declares bankruptcy under Chapter 11 with a prearranged plan, and the photo licensing business has been bleeding out since ChatGPT launched. The October 2026 tech layoff list includes American Express (5% of staff, about 3,500 employees), Barclays (5,000), eBay (9%) and Netflix (6%, about 1,000). At Microsoft, nearly one in three employees —60,000— receives a voluntary buyout offer, according to a tweet reproduced in the thread. The irony comes from those who recall that the same companies that promised to save on staff with AI are now cutting because of AI itself.
The technical limit: if the program runs in memory
There is an underlying technical debate. If software runs locally, it can be analyzed in memory in real time and its behavior reconstructed, making any protection by obfuscation useless. The only real barrier on the horizon is remote applications, where the user only sees results and never the program. Cryptography appears as a last line of defense, met with the same skepticism as any promise of absolute protection.
The point where the analysis gets stuck is the same in every facet: nobody disputes that the code is already out there and can be replicated; what remains unresolved is whether that is enough to topple a giant or only to erode its margin while the courts and the market decide who was right.
In October 2026, an engineer from Atlanta named Brandon Thomas published on GitHub a set of open-source replicas of seven Adobe applications —Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Lightroom, Acrobat Pro, After Effects and InDesign— developed, according to his account, with the help of Claude Opus 5.5. The project has racked up 44,000 stars and updates every three days. It can be downloaded for free for Linux, Windows and Mac. The US software industry accounts for around 9.3% of the country's GDP, according to figures cited in the discussion, and the movement has already spread to Office (WordCraft, GridCraft, DeckCraft), AutoCAD (cadCraft) and Figma (Figcraft).
The trigger is not classic piracy. The argument gaining the most traction is that Adobe's code was not copied, but that an AI programmed from scratch a piece of software that does the same thing with new code. "It's completely legal," one strand of the analysis maintains, comparing the case to Red Hat and Linux: the business model changes, the product is not stolen. Reverse engineering of antiestéticatures, they add, is not the same as copying the source code.
What the law says and what a judge thinks
The legal objection has not gone away. Some point out that whether it is a copy is decided by a judge, not by the enthusiast's judgment, and that the interface may also be protected. The answer that prevails in the conversation is practical: with 20,000 possible clones and the code already free, every lawsuit would take years and, before a court ruled, another version with a changed look would already be out. US jurisdiction, moreover, would not reach clones produced and distributed from other jurisdictions.
The subscription model in the crosshairs
Adobe's business rests on the monthly subscription and cancellation penalties. That is the flank the discussion identifies as vulnerable: mid-sized companies that cannot pirate because of audits and that would now have a legal, free alternative. The calculation that keeps coming up is savings of tens of thousands of euros a year per license. The question is whether the average boss waits until the clone is mature or whether the savings outweigh the risk of debugging young software.
Quality, the argument that holds it back
The enthusiasm has a brake. An open-source clone needs someone who knows how to program to debug it, and nobody massively adopts a tool that fails. Figcraft, the Figma replica, estimates itself at 53% antiestéticature parity and lacks the commercial plugin ecosystem. The discussion splits between those who see the end of closed software and those who believe this only opens the floodgates to experimental projects without the quality of the original.
Getty, the layoffs and the domino effect
The movement does not stop at Adobe. According to a message circulating in the thread, Getty Images declares bankruptcy under Chapter 11 with a prearranged plan, and the photo licensing business has been bleeding out since ChatGPT launched. The October 2026 tech layoff list includes American Express (5% of staff, about 3,500 employees), Barclays (5,000), eBay (9%) and Netflix (6%, about 1,000). At Microsoft, nearly one in three employees —60,000— receives a voluntary buyout offer, according to a tweet reproduced in the thread. The irony comes from those who recall that the same companies that promised to save on staff with AI are now cutting because of AI itself.
The technical limit: if the program runs in memory
There is an underlying technical debate. If software runs locally, it can be analyzed in memory in real time and its behavior reconstructed, making any protection by obfuscation useless. The only real barrier on the horizon is remote applications, where the user only sees results and never the program. Cryptography appears as a last line of defense, met with the same skepticism as any promise of absolute protection.
The point where the analysis gets stuck is the same in every facet: nobody disputes that the code is already out there and can be replicated; what remains unresolved is whether that is enough to topple a giant or only to erode its margin while the courts and the market decide who was right.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (260 replies).
More summaries
-
The Rubiales case sparks a culture war in Spanish sport
Luis Rubiales' kiss on Jenni Hermoso sparks protests and a battle over sexism in Spanish sport. An analysis of the case that defined 2023.
-
AI-driven decompilation threatens proprietary software giants
Amateur groups use AI to decompile Adobe suites, cloning commercial apps in days and shaking the software industry.
-
Riots at Milan's Duomo: looting and rent protest
Riots broke out at Milan's Duomo: looting, stones thrown at the cathedral and a rent protest that Meloni's government is failing to address.
-
Barcelona and the cost of refereeing suspicions
Payments to the refereeing committee's vice-president and a mirror-image suspicion about their rival: the case hanging over Spanish football with no final ruling and no relegation.
-
Álvarez de Toledo calls for sacrifice and sparks online backlash
Spain's PP deputy leader in Madrid calls for sacrifice and faces social media criticism over her aristocratic profile. The debate echoes the 2008 austerity cuts.
-
Clash with 'abertzales' and 'hidden Moors' leaves injured in Spain
A post on X calling protesters 'scum' and mixing immigration with violence offers a chance to examine how the rhetoric of confrontation works on social media.