I tend to side with those who see this as a trap. Whether it is an intentional scheme or a market attempt to make things more attractive, it doesn't really matter to me. what matters to me is that after you spend $120 over one year, you are at the mercy of Adobe to renew the software lease at whatever price they deem to be the right one. no thanks. Its the uncertainty that bothers me, and no amount of FAQs or presidential promises will override the language in the T&C. If they want to smooth over the T&C then change the T&C not the rhetoric around it.
I acknowledge that in the enterprise world, a great many software capabililties are offered in subscription mode, and that "software as a service" is gaining much momentum: companies are in some cases opting to rent software from a cloud provider -- but in these situations (part of) the attractiveness is that the enterprise does not have to maintain the computing infrastructure, which can include large data centers, and the people to maintain them. So if the entrprise does not want to invest in that core competancy it can make sense to use SAAS. However, in my experience these SAAS applications are never ever sold as a one-year low ball contract with no price guarentee after that. no IT organization with a lick of sense would put their enterprise at that much risk. Moreover, the adobe deal does not really reduce the computing requirements of the local Desktop in the sense that subscribers will suddenly have to pay less for their computers as would be the case in the enterprise. So the cost attractiveness of the CC cloud isn't real -- its frosting without knowing what the cake is made of.
I do acknowledge that especially for those without conventional licenses now, that the rental is quite attractive, especially if your work depends on keeping up with the latest capabilities. If you trust Adobe to be price competive after the first year, or you view the $120 first-year expense as an experiment, then its probably right for you.