Adobe are often keen to suggest that they have been the primary innovator in developing the digital rights management space. Although there is speculation as to extent of which they have contributed, there can be little doubt as to whether or not their file format – PDF – is considered to be the logical common output for documents across many platforms where copy protection is needed. While many companies have claimed to have had an input into the file security solutions that we find ourselves using today, such as XrML for example, only Adobe have managed to lead with the sheer scale and reach to make their solution resonate and be considered the global standard. With the evolution of on-line retailing environments, the lack of barriers to entry, and other digital communication advancements; it is now more necessary than ever to ensure that digital rights management tackles copyright theft through adding complications and difficulties to the processes used to steal content. Indeed, it is widely acknowledged that DRM software can only stop copyright theft at some levels – for example, DRM cannot stop manual replication (writing your own copy) in the case of ebook copy prevention. It is said that the primary functions of DRM security software are controlling copying/extraction, printing functionality management and changing after a subsequent save. Such functions are always going to needed where copyright is not surrendered upon receipt of the document. Watermarking – as a copy control and digital rights management solution – is often considered to be surrounded with some uncertainty. In the case of ebook copy prevention, for example, publishers are faced with making a decision where the implementation of watermarking can leave their customers having to sacrifice appearance and usability in return for prevention of black-market distribution. Although the value of this is disputed, we can at least agree that while advancements are under way, such as identifying the purchaser, the video, music and broadcast business do not appear to be moving away from watermarking in a hurry! As electronic learning methods advance, Adobe have been careful to facilitate comment authoring in tandem with document security, to allow both collaboration and copyright implementation. This is something which is unlikely to have much value in commercial publishing, however Adobe would not want to allow any competitors to eat away at a sub-niche and innovate across the board at the same time. The middle ground between practicality, reasonableness, and implementation of the rights that come along with copyright assets, can be best depicted by the situation where the 2000 publication of Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland, which did not allow the book to be read aloud – a feature which is widely considered to be an advantage of PDF documents, and an assumed feature when purchasing a digital document. Some claim that such behaviour goes against accessibility initiatives, while others suggest that the necessity for document security, coupled with the associated disadvantages of market forces, mean that the decision is one which should be made at the free will of the copyright holder. Some find that the controls made available by innovators such as LockLizard – www.locklizard.com - suit them better.
Alice Pierce is a president of lock lizard. He writes about <a href="http://www.locklizard.com">copy protection</a> and <a href="http://www.locklizard.com/pdf_security_news.htm">digital rights management</a>.
Disclaimer: The information presented and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of ArticlePros.com and/or its partners.
