On Thu, Sep 26, 2002, Guylhem Aznar wrote: > Shouldn't they be removed altogether? Preveting copy is encouraging DRM. > DRM should be flushed down the toilets.
I will not remove it (and it isn't really DRM). What I will do in a future version is to only make the copyprevention bit a "recommendation", i.e. the viewer will display an alert saying that this document has the "non-beamable" bit set and ask the user if he/she really want to beam the document. Selecting Yes will beam the document, i.e. we leave the decision in the hands of the user and not to a setting in the document. The user ID protection could be moved out of the viewer into a separate library, i.e. making it more complicated to use ;-) Still, that will not be possible until some kind of plug-in architecture has been implemented. Could also display a dialog making it possible to enter the user ID for a "protected" document, i.e. if the user ID for the device doesn't match you can still provide it manually. Would make it possible to share "protected" documents with your peers. It shouldn't be that complicated to create a desktop tool that can remove the user ID protection (if you know the used user ID:) and create an unprotected document. /Mike _______________________________________________ plucker-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
