Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
May. 29, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Lease Commitments We occupy three office buildings in San Jose, California where our corporate headquarters are located. We reference these office buildings as the Almaden Tower and the East and West Towers. We own the land and the East and West Tower buildings, and lease the Almaden Tower building. The lease agreement for the Almaden Tower is effective through March 2017. We are the investors in the lease receivable related to the Almaden Tower lease in the amount of $80.4 million, which is recorded as investment in lease receivable on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of May 29, 2015, the carrying value of the lease receivable related to the Almaden Tower approximated fair value. Under the agreement for the Almaden Tower, we have the option to purchase the building at any time during the lease term for $103.6 million. If we purchase the building, the investment in the lease receivables may be credited against the purchase price. The residual value guarantee under the Almaden Tower obligation is $89.4 million. The Almaden Tower lease is subject to standard covenants including certain financial ratios that are reported to the lessor quarterly. As of May 29, 2015, we were in compliance with all of the covenants. In the case of a default, the lessor may demand we purchase the building for an amount equal to the lease balance, or require that we remarket or relinquish the building. If we choose to remarket or are required to do so upon relinquishing the building, we are bound to arrange the sale of the building to an unrelated party and will be required to pay the lessor any shortfall between the net remarketing proceeds and the lease balance, up to the residual value guarantee amount less our investment in lease receivable. The Almaden Tower lease qualifies for operating lease accounting treatment and, as such, the building and the related obligation are not included in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Royalties We have royalty commitments associated with the shipment and licensing of certain products. Royalty expense is generally based on a dollar amount per unit sold or a percentage of the underlying revenue. Indemnifications In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products and from time to time, we are subject to claims by our customers under these indemnification provisions. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations. To the extent permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our directors and officers for certain events or occurrences while the director or officer is or was serving at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the director’s or officer’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited, however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. Legal Proceedings In connection with disputes relating to the validity or alleged infringement of third-party intellectual property rights, including patent rights, we have been, are currently and may in the future be subject to claims, negotiations or complex, protracted litigation. Intellectual property disputes and litigation may be very costly and can be disruptive to our business operations by diverting the attention and energies of management and key technical personnel. Although we have successfully defended or resolved past litigation and disputes, we may not prevail in any ongoing or future litigation and disputes. Third-party intellectual property disputes could subject us to significant liabilities, require us to enter into royalty and licensing arrangements on unfavorable terms, prevent us from licensing certain of our products or offering certain of our services, subject us to injunctions restricting our sale of products or services, cause severe disruptions to our operations or the markets in which we compete, or require us to satisfy indemnification commitments with our customers including contractual provisions under various license arrangements and service agreements. Between May 4, 2011 and July 14, 2011, five putative class action lawsuits were filed in Santa Clara Superior Court and Alameda Superior Court in California. On September 12, 2011, the cases were consolidated into In Re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation (“HTEAL”) pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. In the consolidated complaint, Plaintiffs alleged that Adobe, along with Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Lucasfilm and Pixar, agreed not to recruit each other's employees in violation of Federal and state antitrust laws. Plaintiffs claim the alleged agreements suppressed employee compensation and deprived employees of career opportunities. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, monetary damages, treble damages, costs and attorneys fees. All defendants deny the allegations and that they engaged in any wrongdoing of any kind. On October 24, 2013, the court certified a class of all persons who worked in the technical, creative, and/or research and development fields on a salaried basis in the United States for one or more of the following: (a) Apple from March 2005 through December 2009; (b) Adobe from May 2005 through December 2009; (c) Google from March 2005 through December 2009; (d) Intel from March 2005 through December 2009; (e) Intuit from June 2007 through December 2009; (f) Lucasfilm from January 2005 through December 2009; or (g) Pixar from January 2005 through December 2009, excluding retail employees, corporate officers, members of the boards of directors, and senior executives of all defendants. During the first quarter of fiscal 2015, the parties reached another agreement to settle the litigation. In March 2015, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The hearing for final approval is set for July 2015. If the settlement is approved, we expect to incur no additional losses associated with this matter. In addition to intellectual property disputes, we are subject to legal proceedings, claims and investigations in the ordinary course of business, including claims relating to commercial, employment and other matters. Some of these disputes and legal proceedings may include speculative claims for substantial or indeterminate amounts of damages. We consider all claims on a quarterly basis in accordance with GAAP and based on known facts assess whether potential losses are considered reasonably possible, probable and estimable. Based upon this assessment, we then evaluate disclosure requirements and whether to accrue for such claims in our financial statements. This determination is then reviewed and discussed with our Audit Committee and our independent registered public accounting firm. We make a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. These provisions are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to a particular case. Unless otherwise specifically disclosed in this note, we have determined that no provision for liability nor disclosure is required related to any claim against us because: (a) there is not a reasonable possibility that a loss exceeding amounts already recognized (if any) may be incurred with respect to such claim; (b) a reasonably possible loss or range of loss cannot be estimated; or (c) such estimate is immaterial. All legal costs associated with litigation are expensed as incurred. Litigation is inherently unpredictable. However, we believe that we have valid defenses with respect to the legal matters pending against us. It is possible, nevertheless, that our consolidated financial position, cash flows or results of operations could be negatively affected by an unfavorable resolution of one or more of such proceedings, claims or investigations. In connection with our anti-piracy efforts, conducted both internally and through organizations such as the Business Software Alliance, from time to time we undertake litigation against alleged copyright infringers. Such lawsuits may lead to counter-claims alleging improper use of litigation or violation of other laws. We believe we have valid defenses with respect to such counter-claims; however, it is possible that our consolidated financial position, cash flows or results of operations could be affected in any particular period by the resolution of one or more of these counter-claims.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Lease Commitments

We occupy three office buildings in San Jose, California where our corporate headquarters are located. We reference these office buildings as the Almaden Tower and the East and West Towers. We own the land and the East and West Tower buildings, and lease the Almaden Tower building.

The lease agreement for the Almaden Tower is effective through March 2017. We are the investors in the lease receivable related to the Almaden Tower lease in the amount of $80.4 million, which is recorded as investment in lease receivable on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of May 29, 2015, the carrying value of the lease receivable related to the Almaden Tower approximated fair value. Under the agreement for the Almaden Tower, we have the option to purchase the building at any time during the lease term for $103.6 million. If we purchase the building, the investment in the lease receivables may be credited against the purchase price. The residual value guarantee under the Almaden Tower obligation is $89.4 million.

The Almaden Tower lease is subject to standard covenants including certain financial ratios that are reported to the lessor quarterly. As of May 29, 2015, we were in compliance with all of the covenants. In the case of a default, the lessor may demand we purchase the building for an amount equal to the lease balance, or require that we remarket or relinquish the building. If we choose to remarket or are required to do so upon relinquishing the building, we are bound to arrange the sale of the building to an unrelated party and will be required to pay the lessor any shortfall between the net remarketing proceeds and the lease balance, up to the residual value guarantee amount less our investment in lease receivable. The Almaden Tower lease qualifies for operating lease accounting treatment and, as such, the building and the related obligation are not included in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Royalties

We have royalty commitments associated with the shipment and licensing of certain products. Royalty expense is generally based on a dollar amount per unit sold or a percentage of the underlying revenue.

Indemnifications

In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products and from time to time, we are subject to claims by our customers under these indemnification provisions. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations.

To the extent permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our directors and officers for certain events or occurrences while the director or officer is or was serving at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the director’s or officer’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited, however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid.

Legal Proceedings

In connection with disputes relating to the validity or alleged infringement of third-party intellectual property rights, including patent rights, we have been, are currently and may in the future be subject to claims, negotiations or complex, protracted litigation. Intellectual property disputes and litigation may be very costly and can be disruptive to our business operations by diverting the attention and energies of management and key technical personnel. Although we have successfully defended or resolved past litigation and disputes, we may not prevail in any ongoing or future litigation and disputes. Third-party intellectual property disputes could subject us to significant liabilities, require us to enter into royalty and licensing arrangements on unfavorable terms, prevent us from licensing certain of our products or offering certain of our services, subject us to injunctions restricting our sale of products or services, cause severe disruptions to our operations or the markets in which we compete, or require us to satisfy indemnification commitments with our customers including contractual provisions under various license arrangements and service agreements.

Between May 4, 2011 and July 14, 2011, five putative class action lawsuits were filed in Santa Clara Superior Court and Alameda Superior Court in California. On September 12, 2011, the cases were consolidated into In Re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation (“HTEAL”) pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. In the consolidated complaint, Plaintiffs alleged that Adobe, along with Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Lucasfilm and Pixar, agreed not to recruit each other's employees in violation of Federal and state antitrust laws. Plaintiffs claim the alleged agreements suppressed employee compensation and deprived employees of career opportunities. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, monetary damages, treble damages, costs and attorneys fees. All defendants deny the allegations and that they engaged in any wrongdoing of any kind. On October 24, 2013, the court certified a class of all persons who worked in the technical, creative, and/or research and development fields on a salaried basis in the United States for one or more of the following: (a) Apple from March 2005 through December 2009; (b) Adobe from May 2005 through December 2009; (c) Google from March 2005 through December 2009; (d) Intel from March 2005 through December 2009; (e) Intuit from June 2007 through December 2009; (f) Lucasfilm from January 2005 through December 2009; or (g) Pixar from January 2005 through December 2009, excluding retail employees, corporate officers, members of the boards of directors, and senior executives of all defendants. During the first quarter of fiscal 2015, the parties reached another agreement to settle the litigation. In March 2015, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The hearing for final approval is set for July 2015. If the settlement is approved, we expect to incur no additional losses associated with this matter.

In addition to intellectual property disputes, we are subject to legal proceedings, claims and investigations in the ordinary course of business, including claims relating to commercial, employment and other matters. Some of these disputes and legal proceedings may include speculative claims for substantial or indeterminate amounts of damages. We consider all claims on a quarterly basis in accordance with GAAP and based on known facts assess whether potential losses are considered reasonably possible, probable and estimable. Based upon this assessment, we then evaluate disclosure requirements and whether to accrue for such claims in our financial statements. This determination is then reviewed and discussed with our Audit Committee and our independent registered public accounting firm.

We make a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. These provisions are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to a particular case. Unless otherwise specifically disclosed in this note, we have determined that no provision for liability nor disclosure is required related to any claim against us because: (a) there is not a reasonable possibility that a loss exceeding amounts already recognized (if any) may be incurred with respect to such claim; (b) a reasonably possible loss or range of loss cannot be estimated; or (c) such estimate is immaterial.

All legal costs associated with litigation are expensed as incurred. Litigation is inherently unpredictable. However, we believe that we have valid defenses with respect to the legal matters pending against us. It is possible, nevertheless, that our consolidated financial position, cash flows or results of operations could be negatively affected by an unfavorable resolution of one or more of such proceedings, claims or investigations.

In connection with our anti-piracy efforts, conducted both internally and through organizations such as the Business Software Alliance, from time to time we undertake litigation against alleged copyright infringers. Such lawsuits may lead to counter-claims alleging improper use of litigation or violation of other laws. We believe we have valid defenses with respect to such counter-claims; however, it is possible that our consolidated financial position, cash flows or results of operations could be affected in any particular period by the resolution of one or more of these counter-claims.