Aug 14 '15 at 04:00 SMTP failed when receiving the DATA terminator response. Aug 14 '15 at 08:27 Socket / SSL Component Support SSL Protocol Version 3.0 Aug 14 '15 at 08:24 UseMmDescription. Edit Encoder / Edit Decoder dialog box.One of the biggest advantages of free software is that it is usuallyAug 14 '15 at 12:29 tchilkatmailman and tchilkatemail are greyed out in 64-bit compilation mode. 2017.10 V 1 Bosch VMS Viewer Configuration.Applications which do implement thisThis is not the case with Okular, though. Developers of free applications have, as a generalRule, never quite gotten around to implementing this kind of restriction -Even though the low-level poppler PDF-processing libraryMakes such support possible. If the "no copy" flag isSet, cutting and pasting text from the file should - by the standard - be disabled in anyReader application. There is nothing in the format which actively prevents suchActivities these flags are simply instructions which any applicationOperating on PDF files is expected to observe. One might think that the consensus against " antifeatures"In free software is nearly universal, but, as the case of the okular PDF reader in Debian shows, thereThe PDF file format includes a number of protection flags which specifyWhether the reader is allowed to print the file, make changes, or to copyOut excerpts.He filed aSo what I want to know is: why are people putting code into DebianThat limits our freedom? Why are people putting such code into KDE?One of the important roles played by distributors is to serve as anIntermediary between upstream projects and their users. There is a configurationOption which disables this behavior, but the default setting is to enforceJohn Goerzen encountered this behavior inDebian's Okular package suffice to say he was not pleased. Amusingly, the applicationWill still allow the selected region to be saved as an image file, butSending the text to the clipboard is not allowed.Look, having the "power of developers" does not implyDevelopers should feel like crackers, disabling restrictions justBecause they can or in the name of some "freedom".Additionally, Debian KDE maintainer Sune Vuorela claims that the overhead of maintaining aPatch to Okular would exceed the value gained - though it has been pointed out that the patch is trivial - andDownloading PDF files with restrictions in the first place. Beyond that, Pino says:If tomorrow a corporate person complains that Okular does notRespect the PDF format in that sense and that they cannot make useOf it because of that, what should I tell them? They would beRight. Since Okular is meant to follow theStandard, it must do so in this case as well. Okular developer Pino Toscano justifies the copy-restriction antifeature by saying that it'sPart of the PDF format specification. This final bit of finishIs part of the value that distributors add.Find users who are asking for copy restriction features, one might thinkThat this would be an ideal place for the Debian developers in charge ofOkular to provide a more friendly default.But they do not want to do that. A look at a typical distributor's source packages will revealThat a number of applications have been patched in ways which change theirBehavior and generally make them fit in better.
Restrict Editing Greyed Out Word 16.12 Free Software IsIt is now rare to find a distributor shipping aVersion of evince which implements copy restrictions. And, if such threats did exist,The existence of an option to ignore copy restrictions would be problematicIssue back in 2005. There has been a distinct shortage of legal problems(or even threats) associated with any of the other PDF readers which failTo implement this particular behavior. Even the DMCA should notCome into play here the "do not copy" flag is simply a piece of adviceFound in the file which does not constitute an "effective technologicalMeasure" in any way. The copying of excerptsIs allowed by fair use rules almost everywhere. It is notClear which jurisdictions those would be, though. Linux, at all levels, hasFelt free to ignore standards when following them makes no sense. Perhaps this behavior is result of theRelative newness of this application as it accumulates more users, thePressure for more user-friendly behavior is likely to grow.As that pressure mounts, Okular's developers and packagers may find it hardTo justify keeping copy restrictions in place. Okular isAbout the only exception that your editor can find it's interesting toNote that the version of Okular shipped with Fedora Rawhide also implementsCopy restrictions by default. In general, as one wouldExpect, free PDF readers tend not to implement this behavior. Even IF you send a doc to someone 'on the wrong side' they won't be able to open it. But the fines by the OPTA (goverment agency overviewing and checking KPN and other companies in the telecom area) are easily in the millions, so there is quite some pressure.DRM, among other technologies, is used to keep certain employees from certain information. The goverment has forced it to open up it's network, so other providers can compete with KPN on services.To prevent any unfair competition, operations is not allowed to tell all it knows to headquarters (for example numbers about marketshare, revenue, growth, prices etc from competitors).This division is rather dificult to maintain - obviously, as it is still ONE company. The reason is that KPN has both network & services. The government has mandated the company to kind'a split it's operations off from the sales. This is not a feature which adds value forLinux users such features still tend to disappear over time.Ok, you want a real example so here you go.I've worked at KPN, the dutch largest telecom provider. And one could argue that the copy-restriction flag - which interferes with fair-use rights while doing nothing to prevent copying of the file or its contents - makes little sense indeed. Linux, at all levels, has felt free to ignore standards when following them makes no sense. Imho.Posted 21:40 UTC (Mon) by madcoder (subscriber, #30027)As that pressure mounts, Okular's developers and packagers may find it hard to justify keeping copy restrictions in place. It's perfectly valid, legal and morally right. I think a person (which includes a legal person like a company) should have every right to enable and enforce DRM on his/her/their own hardware and software. Filezilla for mac serverThere's no a flag can no if I'm cutting and pasting a section for scholarly research and thus protected by fair use.But that isn't to say that the flags should be silently ignored. Content usage flags can't accurately encode fair use and any such flagging will be overly restrictive. The question is the wishes of the original author insofar as those wishes are not more restrictive than legal doctrine allows. You have to remember that FLOSS licensing only grants you rights that you do not have by default under copyright law without a license.It's not strictly the wishes of the original author that is the question. If strictly enforced they are guaranteed to restrict reasonable fair use.I can't recall any serious discussion among FLOSS licensing supporters about toolizing enforcement of the licensing terms in such a way that it would also restrict fair use of the code or executable carrying the FLOSS license. The flags on the content can't take fair use into account at all. The biggest problem with our content consumption culture is that we haven't made any allowances for content licensing in the interfaces we are using to select and use digital content.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMichelle ArchivesCategories |