Suppose you and friend go to an all-you-can-eat buffet and each of you pays the rate for an adult buffet. Several items in the serving area you don't eat or don't like, but kids or friends back home do, so when you're finished with your meal you ask for a box to take home the unsampled items at the buffet for others back home. And when the establishment says, No, you go home and post an angry review about how they are unfair and monopolistic and won't let you take as much food as you want home with you for what you paid for the buffet. Maybe you do pack your bag with extra food and feel entitled to it and even plan your family's meal budget around how much you can steal from the buffet, but I'm guessing not, and just accept buffet pricing without bad feelings toward the restaurant.
You want three people to share 2 licenses. That's against the rules. Rules that seem reasonable to me. You're getting many Adobe applications for the price of 2.5 applications. A single application is $20/month while the full suite costs $50/month. You are welcome to buy each application you use for $20/month and have your third colleague use Acrobat for $20/month.
Adobe is not going to let you use any or all the applications in the suite for the price of 2.5 applications and also allow you to give away the unused applications to others, letting them avoid paying their own licensing fees.
To resume the buffet metaphor, Adobe has priced their all-you-can-eat (use) buffet (suite) at the cost of 2.5 entrées (apps) and doesn't allow you to take home (give away) leftover items (programs) for others to eat (use). You are welcome to buy each entrée at its own price and take home as many as you buy and let others eat them.
If you feel Adobe is making too much money with their buffet and entrée pricing models, then you're welcome to buy Adobe stock and get some of that extra profit for yourself.