Well, there are damages torts and there's also an unjust enrichment tort. In the paradigm example where you make funding available to your treasurer and he makes an unscheduled stop in Las Vegas to bet it on black, you can sue him for damages. If he lost the bet, he owes you the amount he lost. If he won, he owes you nothing (assuming he went on and deposited the full amount in your treasury as expected).

Or you could sue him on a theory of unjust enrichment, in which case, if he lost, he'd owe you nothing, and if he won, he'd owe you all of his winnings.

It's not clear to me why the same theory wouldn't be available to Adobe, though the copyright question wouldn't be the main thrust of the case then.