Re: PDF files on company Intranet?

On Tue, Jan 18, 2000, Greg Erkins <gerkins[_at_]gci.net> wrote:
>
> There is a difference between a PDF file and computer software. The
> PDF file is a static document like a graphic. Software is like a
> dynamic calculator and compiles new solutions.

I don't see so much distinction between digital software and digital text files. What is the practical difference under copyright law?

Consider that the PDF file can have hyperlinks in it to dynamically present different content.

> To change a PDF file requires an Adobe Writer program which costs
> around $249. The reader is free. The Adobe Writer program can
> download a whole website and thumbnail it, bookmark it, annotate
> it and allow digital signatures to it. The Adobe Reader is just
> that; a reader.

As I pointed out before, the PDF file can be edited (the author can lock it to make that more difficult) and there are other reader and writer programs for PDF, so this argument does not apply either.

> I believe only one file can be opened at a time, though I have
> not downloaded two Adobe Readers to test this.

No, the same PDF file can be opened by two or more readers at the same time, with ease. Unless the author has locked the file, it is also easy to print the work or even reformat it in text or HTML.

A password can be applied to limit opening of the file, but of course users might share passwords.

Greg, I don't think you can argue that the special nature of PDF makes it an exception under copyright law. Instead, we ought to refer to fair use and the first sale doctrine. The newsletter author can distribute in PDF instead of HTML or text in order to try to prevent users from copying the work. Whether this copying and redistribution is a violation of the newsletter copyright, that ought to be decided under copyright law and not by extra technical means to control copying such as the DMCA or software licenses. The reason is that these measures restrict fair use and right of first sale.

Likely the recent case where movie studies sued in NY under the DMCA to prevent DeCSS from being hosted on web sites might raise these issues. (The earlier DeCSS case by the DVD CCA didn't raise DMCA, only trade secret issues and some mysterious copyright claims.)

An earlier post by somebody raised cogently the point, why is this a constitutional issue? I don't know if judges would agree, but it seems to me you can't have copyright unless you have fair use -- the act of publishing and distributing implicitly recognizes that readers must be able to make some use of the work, and the only question is what the extent of fair use ought to be. Also for that reason, it seems to me that the DMCA by allowing works to be encrypted forever is an attempt to bypass the limited term of protection allowed by the Constitution. But I'm not a lawyer and don't have any idea how judges would interpret these questions. I just wanted to try to make sure we have our facts right about PDF.

Eric Eldred
<eldred[_at_]eldritchpress.org> Received on Wed Jan 19 2000 - 17:00:41 GMT