Am Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:25:13 +0200 schrieb "Martin Schröder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2008/4/25 Deanna Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > "For those who would argue that important content might get > > irretrievably locked away in PDF format, I'll remind you that > > Xpdf is open source, and can be modified by end users (the GPL > > even allows this)." > > Go ahead, ignore the authors wishes. Show your disrespect. > The fundamental concept of DRM is flawed. And here is why: In fact this is not about the authors wishes. The author can not disclose content on PDF form or he can choose to encrypt a PDF with some sort of algorithm that is a real encryption. Or he can tell me in the first part of a PDF how he likes me to handle the content of the document or the document itself. DRM on the other side is a mere technical mechanism that FORCES the end user to not be ABLE to use the document in his or her best way. So this is not a wish, it is a senseless blockage. So I think either should people not publish or use mechanisms that really encrypt. Not that ROT13 kind of encryption and also expect the software authors or software distributors to make software dysfunctional just because they wont tell the user what they want (by words or licenses), nor use available technology that does a real encryption and not a pseudo encryption. Maybe authors like their "Encrypted" documents to be readable by everyone - they just dont want them to be inexed by Google - how are we to know what authors want who dont really tell us what they want nor use technics that make sure nobody can decrypt. If I use very weak encryption one can assume that the decryption is not what I (as an author) dont want at all. Thilo
