noiseboy72 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Hello chaps, I have a bit of a conundrum. I have a link to a useful website that removes passwords from PDF files. Great if you want to re-size, lift some text or otherwise extract info from a locked PDF. Use of the software is not illeagal unless copyright is contravened. I guess in this respect its similar to the DVD / Bluray decrypting software I use at work to remove HDCP and allowing me to play Hi-Def through multiple monitors and projectors. The thing is, should I post the link on the forum. My concerns are that if abused, it would be easy to extract areas from Scalescenes files for kit bashing etc. (And yes, it will unlock them, I have tried it) Obviously, if you have downloaded the file, you have permssion from Scalescenes for your own personsal use to print it as many times as you want and use the parts however you wish, but I don't think this extends to extracting a particular element and duplicating or modifying it. Of course, you can already do this by performing a screen dump or printing to PDF, but this is more time consuming than just opening the pdf in Photoshop and manipulating the image. Thoughts please... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Whilst not saying that such software is illegal I wouldn't condone promoting anything on here that affected the copyright, intellectual property or livelihood of anyone in the hobby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod2 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Trusted members are first and foremost the mod-team augmented perhaps by members you know and trust personally. Just a thought (no, I have no interest in either participating nor using such a service ) And given Andy's post, neither have we; best if others don't speak for us on this subject, I think :icon_confused: It would also be nice if this didn't descend into the usual circular debate about copyright, please - the forum's standpoint on that should be well-known enough by now. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Russ (mines a pint) Posted December 19, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 19, 2009 It would also be nice if this didn't descend into the usual circular debate about copyright, please - the forum's standpoint on that should be well-known enough by now. With regards to the OP I dont think that PDF unlocking 'key' software is particularly difficult to find, using conventional search engines, in which case it is probably not necessary to put a direct link on here, given the problems it could cause. With regards to things like Scalescenes I think its a bit of a 'grey area' - If you got a trackplan book and hand-traced it butwith some alterations of your own I think it would become your own creation, but this isn't quite the same sort of thing. I think something which the admin do need to consider is what if someone did make their own modifications to 'print yourself' kits/signs etc and then present them as a workbench topic, as such a thing would obviously be technically possible, it could be seen as either a positive thing (kit-bashing) or not, due to possible copyright re-percussions? It Is possible that a print yourself kit maker could sell more of the original files and that a marketing point might be that you could adapt them without having to buy more than one kit as you would with Metcalfe et al. For what its worth if I was creating a 'print it yourself' kit I think I would have identified the scope & risk for 'retail shrinkage'like this, but then I am dipping in & out of here whilst making up a business plan of my own so sorry if I've baffled anyone with bullsh*t! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 The thing is, should I post the link on the forum. My concerns are that if abused, it would be easy to extract areas from Scalescenes files for kit bashing etc. (And yes, it will unlock them, I have tried it) Thoughts please... Well you might not like them but IMHO no you shouldn't post any such link. To what purpose would posting the link achieve? This seems nothing more than a thinly veiled request looking for tacit approval to posting of the link, which I for one don't approve. If you want to provide a useful service to the modelling community then please feel free to draw up your own original artwork and release it under the creative commons license so that we can all copy and modify without fear of prosecution. However, you could share it with trusted members and offer a 'decryption service' for registered members only. So are you saying I'm not to be trusted? Sorry but I resemble that remark! Now I know you didn't mean it that way but that is how it could be inferred. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 96701 Posted December 19, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 19, 2009 Try this for a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodnok Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 I think something which the admin do need to consider is what if someone did make their own modifications to 'print yourself' kits/signs etc and then present them as a workbench topic, as such a thing would obviously be technically possible, it could be seen as either a positive thing (kit-bashing) or not, due to possible copyright re-percussions? If I buy a "print it yourself kit" of say, a building, I am legally allowed to print several copies. That's the decision the kit creator has taken when they sell me the artwork to print myself, rather than pre-printed artwork. So instead of one house, I can make an estate of identical houses. Well, suppose I want to introduce some variations? I can print the kit, cut it into pieces, and stick it back together differently. Still no problem, right? That's the "real modelling" we call kitbashing. I could even cut it into pieces, re-arrange them, and photocopy it - and thus have several identical "variants". As far as I can tell, still no problem. I'm allowed to print as many copies of the kit as I want - so if I do this, I'm still within both the intention and the letter of the regulations. So given I can do that, why can't I do the same, but instead of using scissors and sticky tape (or even a photocopier), simply use the computer (with which I am far more familiar, and likely to do a better job) and just print the variants I want? I still see that as no problem - the end result is the same, it's just the path to it that's different. The problem comes if I were to hypothetically try and give someone else a copy. For this distribution/licensing method that doesn't matter whether it's a "spare" print I did and didn't use, an electronic copy, or a finished building I'd used for some time on my layout and later removed. For a traditional kit, the two of these that would be possible would NOT be a problem, but now with this distribution mechanism, technically they are. That's the distinction between selling and licensing. This is all independent of whether or not there is any editing at all, and whether or not that editing has been done in paper and card or electronic form. Now, as far as the unlocker website mentioned goes: I would say that is a problem. But not for the reason most people would think. Unlocking the file is IMHO fair use - but sending it to someone else to do so carries the risk of them keeping a copy, which is distribution... If it were a downloadable piece of software you ran on your machine, I'd be worried about it containing viruses or other nasties. Either way, given you can print these, it's not necessary to use anything like this. A bit of ingenuity and a suitable printer driver should be sufficient For what its worth if I was creating a 'print it yourself' kit I think I would have identified the scope & risk for 'retail shrinkage' like this The possibility of "retail shrinkage" with print-it-yourself is independent of whether you have any restrictions in place to prevent modifications. Any computer data (which has essentially zero reproduction cost) will suffer the same issue. Essentially you've got to rely on people's basic morality - and within model railway circles, that seems mostly to be pretty reasonable Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noiseboy72 Posted December 19, 2009 Author Share Posted December 19, 2009 I think the general feeling is that posting this link might cause problems and arguments. I therefore won't post it ! I have no connection with the website offering this (Free) service. To the best of my knowledge, copies are not kept of unlocked files, although sending a file containing sensitive information like bank details might not be the best idea... I would not consider offering any form of "service" to members. Apart from anything else, I would be infringing copyright. I might well email John Wiffen and see what his feelings are on extracting or modifying his designs. There are extremely good reasons for him locking the files in the first place, but unlocking them for kit bashing, not commercial exploitation is not that clear cut. Thanks for the responses chaps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 The thing is, should I post the link on the forum. IMO Short answer is "No" You have already given enough information. If folk want to find out more then they should simply do a search and they will find it themselves .. then as they say what they do in the privacy of their own homes is no ones interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Try this for a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality Jeez Phil, that Wikipedia entry would make you weep (or at least bleed at the ears) Confirms why I thoroughly dislike Wikipedia (citation needed} Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etched Pixels Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 Clearly scalescenes intends people to customise the kits and do interesting things with them (eg the scratch building sheets !) so it doesn't really matter if you take the scissors to it on paper or electronically that I can see - certainly I can cut straighter with the Gimp than scissors !. The PDF locked flag doesn't stop copying anyway - its a polite "not intended to be editing" note, and pretty much all none Adobe software ignores it anyway. Its doubly hard to tell to be honest because the Scalescenes T&C don't make any sense in the first place. They forbid such actions as cutting out the kits unless specifically authorised, touching them up with paint likewise, and arguably displaying them on an exhibition layout. You could also probably argue that you must remove and shred all your scalescenes buildings before selling the layout on. I'm sure its not what Scalescenes intend, but thats what their T&C page says http://www.scalescen...conditions.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.