Re: PDF Files and Copyright

At 21:47 +0100 03/09/2001, Graham Oliver wrote:
>One of the arguments put forward for using PDF files
>on web sites is that the content is not 'editable' by
>the web site visitor, whereas an HTML page is easily
>edited by the web site visitor.
>So 'We use PDF files because our information is
>copyrighted and we want to protect it' is an argument
>put forward.
>Is this right?
>What are the alternative perspectives?

At 16:59 -0400 03/09/2001, David Poehlman wrote:
>If I have a pdf creation tool, I can often edit the document.

I have just bought Adobe Acrobat but don't yet know my way around it 
thoroughly. It's true that I can use it to edit PDFs. It's also true 
that I can "digitally sign" the document and that this signature can 
be verified and alert the enquirer to changes having been made since 
it was signed.

I can also secure the document to require a password to be able to 
open it and / or a password to be able to edit it.

I think these features would allow me as a provider of content to 
feel reasonably assured that I can protect my work, and if necessary, 
prove that it had been edited since I created it.

A plain old HTML file though could easily be edited by another party 
and then supplied via email or another medium to someone else. 
Interestingly enough, another list I'm on has just had a big 
discussion about the concept and methods of attempting to secure the 
HTML. The general consensus is not to try as it can't be done. 
Attempts can merely delay anyone trying to get at the code.



Cheers,

Miraz

-- 
Tips (now with video): <http://www.firstbite.co.nz/mactips/> 
<http://www.firstbite.co.nz/eutips/>
A service of First Bite of the Apple
NZ Mac mailing list (discussion group): <http://www.firstbite.co.nz/nzmac/>

Received on Monday, 3 September 2001 18:40:09 UTC