PDF Reference - Intellectual Property
-
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
-
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
It's a big circle. All it means is that PDF and Microsoft's format will be replaced with another "open" format that, over time, goes through the circle as well. BTW, got a link to the IP section in version 1.7? Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
It's a big circle. All it means is that PDF and Microsoft's format will be replaced with another "open" format that, over time, goes through the circle as well. BTW, got a link to the IP section in version 1.7? Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
Well, if MS are more open in how they let people use their new format, won't that just push people towards MS ? Isn't the new format XML based ( and therefore, one presumes an XSL transform could be used to create them ) ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
-
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
i also think you read i wrong...or are taking it too seriously what they are saying... for example., if you open up a PDF in notepad, you will see how "objects" are implemented, there is a certian, lets say "code" for each object., like 14 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /Type1 /BaseFont /AGaramond−Semibold /FirstChar 0 /LastChar 255 /Widths 21 0 R /FontDescriptor 7 0 R /Encoding 25 0 R >> endobj what they do not want., is another company (i ofcourse am not implying that MS would so something liek this) to create., lets say a XPDF., and uses the same "code" for its objects., i.e. j++ and java
-
i also think you read i wrong...or are taking it too seriously what they are saying... for example., if you open up a PDF in notepad, you will see how "objects" are implemented, there is a certian, lets say "code" for each object., like 14 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /Type1 /BaseFont /AGaramond−Semibold /FirstChar 0 /LastChar 255 /Widths 21 0 R /FontDescriptor 7 0 R /Encoding 25 0 R >> endobj what they do not want., is another company (i ofcourse am not implying that MS would so something liek this) to create., lets say a XPDF., and uses the same "code" for its objects., i.e. j++ and java
I'm referring to the PDF export from MS Office confrontation they had recently and not the new Vista XPS print driver file format. The wording in the "Intellectual Property" section was always very blunt about anyone can create pdf's from their apps using information obtained from the spec. No harm, no foul. It always gave me a comfortable fuzzy feeling that I wasn't crossing any lines by creating a product that created documents using their format and data structures. This section has been intact and hardly modified since the Adobe Acrobat 4 days. Suddenly, in version 1.7 the "Intellectual Property" section got much shorter and the four bullet points that always gave me that warm fuzzy were removed. I'm not sure what it means. That's where my concern is. I can't point to the spec and confidently say I'm allowed to create PDF's without using Acrobat software. They always had many other statements protecting the specification specifically which is to be expected. That's always been there and continues to be there. Compare and contrast the intellectual property section of Version 1.6(and prior) to Version 1.7 and note what's been taken out and then ask yourself why they chose to do that if nothing has changed.
-
i spent about 40 hours reading that doc when i had to embed sound + images into a pdf on the fly and i was thinking why wld anyone in their right mind read this stuff.... or have time to read it... looks like i found someone...
zorro911 wrote:
why wld anyone in their right mind read this stuff
Because I was tasked with creating a PDF writer a while back and continue to maintain and enhance it. But, I would have to agree that the specification is utterly confusing and so horribly complex that it surprises me how this ever became so popular to transfer documents with in the first place.
-
zorro911 wrote:
why wld anyone in their right mind read this stuff
Because I was tasked with creating a PDF writer a while back and continue to maintain and enhance it. But, I would have to agree that the specification is utterly confusing and so horribly complex that it surprises me how this ever became so popular to transfer documents with in the first place.
the pdfs i create are dynamic from a .net app, i use abcpdf from websupergoo who have methods to write out the objects, so i had to read it to ., to specify what actually got "written out" in the end, it majically worked., i wld never clean up the code i had to write, or even visit it again, thats how messy it got
-
Well, if MS are more open in how they let people use their new format, won't that just push people towards MS ? Isn't the new format XML based ( and therefore, one presumes an XSL transform could be used to create them ) ?
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
I was guessing the wording changes were because of Microsoft's decision to provide the PDF export functionality/download in Office. Adobe's wording was so explicit and open that I was assuming it may have hurt their legal battles and they were now changing it to prevent it from happening again.
Christian Graus wrote:
Isn't the new format XML based
From what I've read, that seems to be the case and it will be a welcome change if it goes that way. One thing I noticed about the Vista XPS print driver file format is the same document is roughly twice as large than the same document rendered in PDF Postscript. That will be a hard pill to swallow.
-
the pdfs i create are dynamic from a .net app, i use abcpdf from websupergoo who have methods to write out the objects, so i had to read it to ., to specify what actually got "written out" in the end, it majically worked., i wld never clean up the code i had to write, or even visit it again, thats how messy it got
-
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
-
I noticed the new PDF Reference, Sixth Edition for Version 1.7 no longer promotes the happy programming eutopia that was evident in version 1.4 through 1.6. Specifically, the "Intellectual Property" section used to say in plain and simple english (I won't quote it exactly so they can't sue me) :-D Anyone can (within reason): 1) make PDF files 2) write drivers that make pdf files 3) writes software that consumes pdf files and does (cool) stuff with it 4) do whatever it takes to utilize the data structures listed in the specification to get others on board the pdf programming train Now in version 1.7 of the specification, the "Intellectual Property" section gives some legal blah, blah, blah that leaves you guessing if you have any right to spit a PDF out of any program you write. "We continue to promote the use of PDF...blah, blah, blah" and then a link to their site. This link leads you to a section that basically lists the patent numbers with a little more blah, blah, blah. Frickin' Microsoft really ruffled their feathers on this last go around and the rest of us bottom dwellers, who can't afford to hire a lawyer to explain the patent mumbo jumbo to them, are left in a legal limbo never before seen in PDF land. Oh, the horror...the horror :sigh:
Patent attorneys eat their own young. Assuming, of course, they let their mates survive long enough to bear their young. X|
Software Zen:
delete this;