| |||||||||||||
up-sideup-sidePosted Jun 3, 2009 11:00 UTC (Wed) by mbanck (subscriber, #9035)In reply to: up-side by jospoortvliet Parent article: Okular, Debian, and copy restrictions
The point is that the okular problem is not about DRM (even though it is worded as such in the GUI). What we are talking about is advisory locking - the PDF has a bit set and the standard says what should happen; however there is no encryption or anything going on.
You can print the PDF, you can copy the PDF, you just cannot copy&paste if the application honors the bit. So I don't see how this pertains to your KPN example (which might be a valid example for DRM or not, I will not judge on that).
Michael
(Log in to post comments)
up-side Posted Jun 3, 2009 12:34 UTC (Wed) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270) [Link]
It means that, if applications implement the standard correctly, an individual can't ACCIDENTALLY copy information from the document or print the document. That gives the company deniability and shifts the liability for violations to the individual who broke the rules.
This is important to many companies. My previous employer often set the no-copy/no-print flags on PDFs that were covered either by internal distribution restrictions (e.g., registered company secrets) or external restrictions (documents received from third parties with restrictions).
The point isn't to make it impossible to copy (they would love to do that, but recognize that it's impossible in an era when every mobile has a camera can take screenshots), but to make it obvious to people when they are breaking the rules.
|
|||||||||||||