Is it possible to protect PDF files from local saving?

Evan Deez wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer?

No. If you have Acrobat, then you can put a password on a PDF that discourages the average user from opening it, and/or printing or editing it (or copying images or text). But saving – nope. Not much you can do about it.

On Sun, 9 Nov 2008 19:29:52 -0500, "Evan Deez" wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer? (I realize power surfers know how to get *anything* — even streaming media — which is why I’m specifying "average web surfer").

Like Flash won’t let you easily save flash content on your local drive… could the same be done with PDF? In other words, just display it (temp file) but not allow it to save locally permanently?

Nothing, absolute nothing is protected on Internet, Evan, except for the real (rather under_) ‘average web surfer’. The moment you publish something on Internet, it’s world property.

Dave (power surfer:-)

"Dave" wrote in message

On Sun, 9 Nov 2008 19:29:52 -0500, "Evan Deez" wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer? (I realize power surfers know how to get *anything* — even streaming media — which is why I’m specifying "average web surfer").

Nothing, absolute nothing is protected on Internet, Evan, except for the real (rather under_) ‘average web surfer’. The moment you publish something on Internet, it’s world property.

Which is why I went through the trouble of specifying "average web surfer" and "I realize power surfers know how to get *anything*" — to avoid the type of reply you just posted. 😉 Didn’t work, though. Heh.

"John J" wrote in message

Evan Deez wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer?

No. If you have Acrobat, then you can put a password on a PDF that discourages the average user from opening it, and/or printing or editing it (or copying images or text). But saving – nope. Not much you can do about it.

Please define the "or" in your "and/or" statements. Are you saying there a way to make the PDF file open-able, but NOT printable or editable (copying images or text)?

How? Seems to me the password would prevent all — not just some — of these actions. If you can’t open it, you surely can’t print or edit it. But the way you phrased this hints that there’s a way to open it but not print or edit it.

I want people to see it. Just not save / print / edit (copy from) it. If they can save it anyway, I’d still like to know how to prevent the other two. But it has to be at least viewable.

"Evan Deez" found these unused words:

"John J" wrote in message

Evan Deez wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer?

No. If you have Acrobat, then you can put a password on a PDF that discourages the average user from opening it, and/or printing or editing it (or copying images or text). But saving – nope. Not much you can do about it.

Please define the "or" in your "and/or" statements. Are you saying there a way to make the PDF file open-able, but NOT printable or editable (copying images or text)?

How? Seems to me the password would prevent all — not just some — of these actions. If you can’t open it, you surely can’t print or edit it. But the way you phrased this hints that there’s a way to open it but not print or edit it.

Correct.

I want people to see it. Just not save / print / edit (copy from) it. If they can save it anyway, I’d still like to know how to prevent the other two. But it has to be at least viewable.

In Acrobat press F1

Evan Deez wrote:

"John J" wrote in message

Evan Deez wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer?

No. If you have Acrobat, then you can put a password on a PDF that discourages the average user from opening it, and/or printing or editing it (or copying images or text). But saving – nope. Not much you can do about it.

Please define the "or" in your "and/or" statements. Are you saying there a way to make the PDF file open-able, but NOT printable or editable (copying images or text)?

Briefly, yes, with the usual caveats that screen shots can copy text to a raster image, and of course copy illustrations (limited to the resolution of the screen presentation.) To some persons that is adequate protection.

I will clarify further. Using Acrobat you can put a password on a file so that it cannot be opened (by the average user) without the password. That means the file can be saved but not read (therefore contents cannot copied by any means.) That is a rather useless feature for the Web presentation because it will not present.

IN ADDITIONl TO, OR you can place a password on it to control permissions. By this I mean that you can make the document unprintable, and/or unavailable to selecting type or illustrations. But it can be read and saved without the password.

I believe the second option above is what you want.

After (or if) a person provides the second password, then he can allow printing, and/or copying of text or illustrations.

I do not know if Adobe offers a trial version of Acrobat, but if you can get it then look to the menu item, "Advanced" -> "Security" -> "Show
Security Properties" and then trigger password option.

Keep in mind that the second option is mainly intended not to keep the document from being read, copied (in parts) by screen captures, or saved, but to control COLLABORATION – unauthorized/authorized modification of the original document as it passes between persons for mark-up and approvals. Adobe offers a security server to help manage collaboration security using security templates, certificates and other devices. It is powerful but not within the scope of web serving to the public which is what you wanted.

I hope this helps.

John J wrote:

After (or if) a person provides the second password, then he can allow printing, and/or copying of text or illustrations.

Clarifying again – two passwords are not necessary. What I should have written is "provides a password to the second option".

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:23:10 -0500, "Evan Deez" wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

On Sun, 9 Nov 2008 19:29:52 -0500, "Evan Deez" wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer? (I realize power surfers know how to get *anything* — even streaming media — which is why I’m specifying "average web surfer").

Nothing, absolute nothing is protected on Internet, Evan, except for the real (rather under_) ‘average web surfer’. The moment you publish something on Internet, it’s world property.

Which is why I went through the trouble of specifying "average web surfer" and "I realize power surfers know how to get *anything*" — to avoid the type of reply you just posted. 😉 Didn’t work, though. Heh.

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

Dave

Dave wrote:

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

We have drifted from the OP’s subject, but it has been answered so – Yer kidding, right? You cannot copyright that piece. It is way into the public domain.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:55:49 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

We have drifted from the OP’s subject, but it has been answered so – Yer kidding, right? You cannot copyright that piece. It is way into the public domain.

Even a photo of the moon can be copyrighted, if I took it. Not the moon, but the photo. Is it so difficult to understand?

Dave

Dave wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:55:49 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

We have drifted from the OP’s subject, but it has been answered so – Yer kidding, right? You cannot copyright that piece. It is way into the public domain.

Even a photo of the moon can be copyrighted, if I took it. Not the moon, but the photo. Is it so difficult to understand?

I see your point, now.

To clarify: if you were to scan or photograph each page, then would you own the copyright for the set as it appeared in those images? Case: Would you expect to be protected from others making scans/photos and selling theirs?

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:20:35 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:55:49 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

We have drifted from the OP’s subject, but it has been answered so – Yer kidding, right? You cannot copyright that piece. It is way into the public domain.

Even a photo of the moon can be copyrighted, if I took it. Not the moon, but the photo. Is it so difficult to understand?

I see your point, now.

To clarify: if you were to scan or photograph each page, then would you own the copyright for the set as it appeared in those images? Case: Would you expect to be protected from others making scans/photos and selling theirs?

Glad you see my point.

To clarify: If you stand next to the Leaning Tower of Pisa busy photographing it in the company of thirty other photographers, everyone of them taking photos of it, do you share copyright on your photos with them? Because ‘it is way into the public domain’? For what it is worth, I am the owner of books which maybe, only maybe, have no duplicates. Books older than a century. If I photograph anything in any of those books
the copyright is mine.

"Dave" wrote in message

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:20:35 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:55:49 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

We have drifted from the OP’s subject, but it has been answered so – Yer
kidding, right? You cannot copyright that piece. It is way into the public domain.

Even a photo of the moon can be copyrighted, if I took it. Not the moon, but the photo. Is it so difficult to understand?

I see your point, now.

To clarify: if you were to scan or photograph each page, then would you own the copyright for the set as it appeared in those images? Case: Would you expect to be protected from others making scans/photos and selling theirs?

Glad you see my point.

To clarify: If you stand next to the Leaning Tower of Pisa busy photographing it in the company of thirty other photographers, everyone of them taking photos of it, do you share copyright on your photos with them? Because ‘it is way into the public domain’?

Red Herring. Stick to the specifics of the case at hand. There is a good reason that copyright decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. Moving on, then…

For what it is worth, I am the owner of books which maybe, only maybe, have no duplicates. Books older than a century. If I photograph anything in any of those books
the copyright is mine.

If I come across another copy of the book and transform the material to type, I can publish it without worries of violating your _pictures of the book’s pages_. I can also take pictures of the book (as you did) without worryinig about transgressing upon your copyright of your pictures.

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:17:15 -0600, "John J"
wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:20:35 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:55:49 -0600, John J wrote:

Dave wrote:

It’s said light heartedly, but still stating the fact that published files is royal game unless this is what you do to it:
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yvlm4g&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 This (plus others) was uploaded last night
and is more than a hundred years old.

We have drifted from the OP’s subject, but it has been answered so – Yer
kidding, right? You cannot copyright that piece. It is way into the public domain.

Even a photo of the moon can be copyrighted, if I took it. Not the moon, but the photo. Is it so difficult to understand?

I see your point, now.

To clarify: if you were to scan or photograph each page, then would you own the copyright for the set as it appeared in those images? Case: Would you expect to be protected from others making scans/photos and selling theirs?

Glad you see my point.

To clarify: If you stand next to the Leaning Tower of Pisa busy photographing it in the company of thirty other photographers, everyone of them taking photos of it, do you share copyright on your photos with them? Because ‘it is way into the public domain’?

Red Herring. Stick to the specifics of the case at hand. There is a good reason that copyright decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. Moving on, then…

For what it is worth, I am the owner of books which maybe, only maybe, have no duplicates. Books older than a century. If I photograph anything in any of those books
the copyright is mine.

If I come across another copy of the book and transform the material to type, I can publish it without worries of violating your _pictures of the book’s pages_. I can also take pictures of the book (as you did) without worryinig about transgressing upon your copyright of your pictures.

Of course..! It is only now that you see my point. I am really surprised listening to your question. Yer kidding, right? Not simply if you come across a copy of the book but if you have the owners permission to scan pages or photographing it, the copyright of your photos will be yours. Remember the moon… you may taking photos of it,okay, don’t worry, my copyright is only on my photos of the moon..

Dave wrote:

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:17:15 -0600, "John J"

If I come across another copy of the book and transform the material to type, I can publish it without worries of violating your _pictures of the book’s pages_. I can also take pictures of the book (as you did) without worryinig about transgressing upon your copyright of your pictures.

Of course..! It is only now that you see my point. I am really surprised listening to your question. Yer kidding, right? Not simply if you come across a copy of the book but if you have the owners permission to scan pages or photographing it, the copyright of your photos will be yours. Remember the moon… you may taking photos of it,okay, don’t worry, my copyright is only on my photos of the moon..

I was rather certain we agreed from the start. The dialog was to affirm to anyone else following. The Yer Kidding thing was intentionally provocative.

We are good.

On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 07:40:03 -0600, John J wrote:

I was rather certain we agreed from the start. The dialog was to affirm to anyone else following. The Yer Kidding thing was intentionally provocative.

We are good.

True, and so were I… and I didn’t miss the intention:-) Keep well, John

Dave

"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote in message

I want people to see it. Just not save / print / edit (copy from) it. If they can save it anyway, I’d still like to know how to prevent the other two. But it has to be at least viewable.

In Acrobat press F1

Or stated more succinctly, RTFM.

I did, and did not find anything resembling "protect from editing". I saw passwords and certification mentioned, but nothing along the lines of a "do not allow copying/importing individual images" checkbox.

So again, I ask : How do I protect my PDF file’s individual images from copy/import? I realize a screenshot will allow copying the final product, but I’m talking about the individual image layers.

"Evan Deez" wrote in message

"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote in message

I want people to see it. Just not save / print / edit (copy from) it. If they can save it anyway, I’d still like to know how to prevent the other two. But it has to be at least viewable.

In Acrobat press F1

Or stated more succinctly, RTFM.

I did, and did not find anything resembling "protect from editing". I saw passwords and certification mentioned, but nothing along the lines of a "do not allow copying/importing individual images" checkbox.
So again, I ask : How do I protect my PDF file’s individual images from copy/import? I realize a screenshot will allow copying the final product, but I’m talking about the individual image layers.

I should probably mention that I don’t want a password to be involved. I want the images protected, period. I don’t even want a password to be prompted.

"Evan Deez" found these unused words:

"Evan Deez" wrote in message

"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote in message

I want people to see it. Just not save / print / edit (copy from) it. If they can save it anyway, I’d still like to know how to prevent the other two. But it has to be at least viewable.

In Acrobat press F1

Or stated more succinctly, RTFM.

I did, and did not find anything resembling "protect from editing". I saw passwords and certification mentioned, but nothing along the lines of a "do not allow copying/importing individual images" checkbox.

It’s there under "security"

So again, I ask : How do I protect my PDF file’s individual images from copy/import? I realize a screenshot will allow copying the final product, but I’m talking about the individual image layers.

I should probably mention that I don’t want a password to be involved. I want the images protected, period. I don’t even want a password to be prompted.

You’ll have to write your own program for that.

Computer ‘protection’ hinges upon passwords for various ‘permissions’.

Hint, If I can -=view=- it, I can copy it!

"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote in message

"Evan Deez" found these unused words:

"Evan Deez" wrote in message

"Sir F. A. Rien" wrote in message

I want people to see it. Just not save / print / edit (copy from) it. If
they can save it anyway, I’d still like to know how to prevent the other
two. But it has to be at least viewable.

In Acrobat press F1

Or stated more succinctly, RTFM.

I did, and did not find anything resembling "protect from editing". I saw
passwords and certification mentioned, but nothing along the lines of a "do not allow copying/importing individual images" checkbox.

It’s there under "security"

So again, I ask : How do I protect my PDF file’s individual images from copy/import? I realize a screenshot will allow copying the final product,
but I’m talking about the individual image layers.

I should probably mention that I don’t want a password to be involved. I want the images protected, period. I don’t even want a password to be prompted.

You’ll have to write your own program for that.

Computer ‘protection’ hinges upon passwords for various ‘permissions’.
Hint, If I can -=view=- it, I can copy it!

I find it frustrating to have to repeat myself to the OP that what I wrote is to be READ. It’s all there in the post.

Reiss is as right as Reign. If a person can view it, he can copy it. Even text put up as raster images can be put through OCR, even via a plugin, but I won’t point to a source.

I find it disappointing that even I can crack the Acrobat paswwords. (or could – haven’t tried it for a couple years). I’d think Adobe would beef up the algorithm.

On Nov 9, 7:29 pm, "Evan Deez" wrote:

Is there any way to protect a PDF file from being downloaded/saved on a local computer by an average web surfer? (I realize power surfers know how to get *anything* — even streaming media — which is why I’m specifying "average web surfer").

Like Flash won’t let you easily save flash content on your local drive… could the same be done with PDF? In other words, just display it (temp file) but not allow it to save locally permanently?

No. The fact that someone is viewing it means the file has been downloaded. It’s in your temp browser folder.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish? There might be other avenues if you can explain a little more in detail.

Reiss is as right as Reign. If a person can view it, he can copy it. Even text put up as raster images can be put through OCR, even via a plugin, but I won’t point to a source.

I find it disappointing that even I can crack the Acrobat paswwords. (or could – haven’t tried it for a couple years). I’d think Adobe would beef up the algorithm.

Why bother when the content can be obtained via screen captures and OCR?

M.L. wrote:

Reiss is as right as Reign. If a person can view it, he can copy it. Even text put up as raster images can be put through OCR, even via a plugin, but I won’t point to a source.

I find it disappointing that even I can crack the Acrobat paswwords. (or could – haven’t tried it for a couple years). I’d think Adobe would beef up the algorithm.

Why bother when the content can be obtained via screen captures and OCR?

Do you have a reading handicap? Read up.

Reiss is as right as Reign. If a person can view it, he can copy it. Even text put up as raster images can be put through OCR, even via a plugin, but I won’t point to a source.

I find it disappointing that even I can crack the Acrobat paswwords. (or could – haven’t tried it for a couple years). I’d think Adobe would beef up the algorithm.

Why bother when the content can be obtained via screen captures and OCR?

Do you have a reading handicap? Read up.

I was commenting on the futility of beefing up their algorithm. Looks like you were reading into something…else.