View Full Version : Adobe ADEPT DRM for PDF circumvented


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

i♥cabbages
02-25-2009, 10:41 PM
Déjà vu time! I have successfully and reproducibly circumvented Adobe's ADEPT DRM system for PDF files. A discussion of the system and the circumvention is available in a blog post I've made on the subject: Link removed

zelda_pinwheel
02-25-2009, 10:52 PM
you need a mask and cape.

AnemicOak
02-25-2009, 10:54 PM
That was quick. What's next ;)

pilotbob
02-25-2009, 10:55 PM
That was quick. What's next ;)

Sony LRX?

BOb

AnemicOak
02-25-2009, 10:56 PM
Sony LRX?

BOb

That's all thats left isn't it?

pilotbob
02-25-2009, 10:57 PM
That's all thats left isn't it?

Pretty much.

BOb

AnemicOak
02-25-2009, 10:57 PM
I guess there's Topaz too.

pilotbob
02-25-2009, 10:58 PM
I guess there's Topaz too.

Good point.

BOb

AnemicOak
02-25-2009, 11:54 PM
I don't have any DRM'd PDF's anymore, but I tried it out on Whiskey Rebels (one of the free Random House books) and it worked perfectly.

=X=
02-26-2009, 12:22 AM
Déjà vu time! I have successfully and reproducibly circumvented Adobe's ADEPT DRM system for PDF files. A discussion of the system and the circumvention is available in a blog post I've made on the subject: Circumventing Adobe ADEPT DRM for PDF (http://i-u2665-cabbages.blogspot.com/2009/02/circumventing-adobe-adept-drm-for-pdf.html).

i♥cabbages you rock! I'm taking back every bad thing I've said about cabbages, stemming as far back as my childhood days :)

=X=

=X=
02-26-2009, 12:23 AM
That's all thats left isn't it?

According to Nick the IMP guy there is also IMP.

=X=

chorpler
02-26-2009, 12:45 AM
I get "Error -5 while decompressing data." This PDF was downloaded with Acrobat 6.0 Professional; perhaps you have to download with Digital Editions? I'll find out.

chorpler
02-26-2009, 12:52 AM
I get "Error -5 while decompressing data." This PDF was downloaded with Acrobat 6.0 Professional; perhaps you have to download with Digital Editions? I'll find out.

Yep, it works fine when downloaded with Digital Editions. So those who have been using the old Acrobat 6.0 extract trick will have to re-download their files with Digital Editions.

Leep
02-26-2009, 02:28 AM
i♥cabbages - we love you too! Thank you - so many really good library books are available only in Pdf. We mobi people now have a new world of pdf thanks to you.
Works like a charm - Much appreciated!

haliava
02-26-2009, 03:43 AM
Interesting. Decrypts recently loaded (via DE) pdf's just fine. Can't decrypt the file that was bought ages ago and imported in DE. Error message is "can't find book session key".

Anggun
02-26-2009, 03:48 AM
Interesting. Decrypts recently loaded (via DE) pdf's just fine. Can't decrypt the file that was bought ages ago and imported in DE. Error message is "can't find book session key".

I got the same error at first. Then, I downloaded the books again. And I found a few books which I was able to decrypt (so say the prompt) but when I try to open them, it keeps saying the files are damaged.
The common denominator among all those that turned out this way is that they are downloaded thru .acsm and not ebx.etd...
Then, I tried with a test file from diesel-ebooks (using .acsm) and I was able to open it... Yet, I got the previous error with the books I bought from there.

joblack
02-26-2009, 05:08 AM
I got the same error at first. Then, I downloaded the books again. And I found a few books which I was able to decrypt (so say the prompt) but when I try to open them, it keeps saying the files are damaged.
The common denominator among all those that turned out this way is that they are downloaded thru .acsm and not ebx.etd...
Then, I tried with a test file from diesel-ebooks (using .acsm) and I was able to open it... Yet, I got the previous error with the books I bought from there.

moved it ...

JSWolf
02-26-2009, 06:39 AM
Well done!

i♥cabbages
02-26-2009, 10:10 AM
I got the same error at first. Then, I downloaded the books again. And I found a few books which I was able to decrypt (so say the prompt) but when I try to open them, it keeps saying the files are damaged.
The common denominator among all those that turned out this way is that they are downloaded thru .acsm and not ebx.etd...
Then, I tried with a test file from diesel-ebooks (using .acsm) and I was able to open it... Yet, I got the previous error with the books I bought from there.

This will only work with books downloaded or activated with Digital Editions, but should work for all of them. If you (or anyone else) has a PDF which opens in DE but doesn't decrypt properly, please e-mail your key file and the PDF file to <i.u2665.cabbages@gmail.com> and I'll try to sort it out.

haliava
02-26-2009, 10:31 AM
If you (or anyone else) has a PDF which opens in DE but doesn't decrypt properly, please e-mail your key file and the PDF file to <i.u2665.cabbages@gmail.com> and I'll try to sort it out.
Sure. Bought from ediesel w/Acrobat Reader 6 years ago. Imported into DE when DE for Sony Reader came out, opens fine in DE on Windows as well.

elpheaba
02-26-2009, 10:36 AM
I really want topaz next, all the books I want on Amazon are in topaz.:book2:

soalla
02-26-2009, 11:08 AM
Thanks, man, that's excellent news!
I've yet to try it :) but I'm sure it'll do nicely, as the ePub one! Thanks again!!

chorpler
02-26-2009, 11:48 AM
Sure. Bought from ediesel w/Acrobat Reader 6 years ago. Imported into DE when DE for Sony Reader came out, opens fine in DE on Windows as well.

Aah, I bet that's it. PDF files downloaded by Acrobat 6 and Acrobat 7 are slightly different than those downloaded directly by Digital Editions. The old "find 'Print First' in the PDF file and modify it, then open it in Acrobat 6" trick wouldn't work in Digital Editions-downloaded files, because there was no "Print First" line to find.

If there's no way to re-download the PDF with Digital Editions, it may require another version of the script to strip the DRM...

salyavin
02-26-2009, 12:16 PM
you need a mask and cape.

More like he needs a beer for a job well done.

pilotbob
02-26-2009, 01:12 PM
More like he needs a beer for a job well done.

Yea... if he is old enough to drink.

BOb

joblack
02-26-2009, 01:48 PM
One remark:

Of course the script doesn't remove (personal tracking) ids in the content (not the metadata) of the PDF. That means if the ebook provider inserted some tracking URIs (check for the codeword with a hex editor or search for hyperlinks) you have to remove and substitute it yourself. The same occures with watermarks or similar methods.

I have found a personal tracking id in an URI in my providers pdf so it is recommended to check for that before you 'loose' your ebook to somebody else (to be clear: of course I don't support piracy) ...

Alternatively you can add the substitute command in the

def escape_string(self, string):

function (worked for my provider).

pilotbob
02-26-2009, 01:50 PM
I have found a personal tracking id in an URI in my providers pdf so it is recommended to check for that before you 'loose' your ebook to somebody else ...


We all assume you are doing the right thing and only using this on eBooks that you have purchased for your own use and you aren't passing out ebooks after you decrypt them.

If you aren't "loosing" the books, as you shouldn't be any way there is no need to worry about identifying info on the files.

BOb

joblack
02-26-2009, 01:54 PM
We all assume you are doing the right thing and only using this on eBooks that you have purchased for your own use and you aren't passing out ebooks after you decrypt them.

If you aren't "loosing" the books, as you shouldn't be any way there is no need to worry about identifying info on the files.

BOb

You're right in that point (over the time I have bought over 200 drm'ed ebooks for myself) but I still was shocked that they included some tracking items in my ebook.

Its none of their business how long I read which ebook. I'm very concerned about my privacy.

They aren't putting some wireless account reading devices on paperback books.

llasram
02-26-2009, 02:01 PM
I have found a personal tracking id in an URI in my providers pdf so it is recommended to check for that before you 'loose' your ebook to somebody else ...

That doesn't sound so bad to me, actually. I think I might be a fan of "social DRM." It doesn't prevent you from using the file in any particular way or sharing it with any particular person, but provides some disincentive for out-right piracy (yarr!).

joblack
02-26-2009, 02:09 PM
That doesn't sound so bad to me, actually. I think I might be a fan of "social DRM." It doesn't prevent you from using the file in any particular way or sharing it with any particular person, but provides some disincentive for out-right piracy (yarr!).

Think about a device which records when you're sleeping, when you're eating, when you're at the bathroom and when you're having sex.

Well, for some people that is not a problem but in my opinion it's none of their business what I do in my free time (as long as it's in the law).

And think about the possibilities. Imagine they would get that you were reading a book about sex longer than the average pearson. How long would it take that somebody will call you and make you an offer related to that ...

pilotbob
02-26-2009, 02:58 PM
Its none of their business how long I read which ebook. I'm very concerned about my privacy.


I see. But, I don't understand how having YOUR info in YOUR file is going to affect YOUR privacy. As long as you keep the file private.

BOb

JSWolf
02-26-2009, 03:03 PM
What I've like to be broken next is LRX format.

joblack
02-26-2009, 05:48 PM
I see. But, I don't understand how having YOUR info in YOUR file is going to affect YOUR privacy. As long as you keep the file private.

BOb

The URI connects to the server and sends my customer no. and the book id to it. The ebook provider can create reading "reading profiles".

A similar behaviour can be seen in some of the new Electronic Arts games. They secretly send information to the server.

Jellby
02-27-2009, 12:05 PM
Unknown post id, it may have expired or been deleted :-/

Sydney's Mom
02-27-2009, 12:31 PM
OMG, I just found this! I cannot wait to get home and un-DRM the library book I checked out a week ago in anticipation! Hopefully, we won't have to have 3 pages of errors from me. i♥cabbages, I love you!!

i♥cabbages
02-27-2009, 01:00 PM
Unknown post id, it may have expired or been deleted :-/

I had a new version of the script to post anyway. Link in the blog post updated.

Sydney's Mom
02-27-2009, 02:55 PM
Totally unfair I have to work. I now know which script to download, have my key, have the library book in DE - if this works, no more buying books for me! To the library I will go(in cyberspace).

I can't wait!

Debra

Sydney's Mom
02-27-2009, 08:58 PM
OMG, this is soooo easy to use! Thank you so much, i♥cabbages.

Debra

slayda
02-27-2009, 10:18 PM
:iloveyou: i♥cabbages but I still hate cabbages. ;) :rolleyes: :p

Sydney's Mom
02-27-2009, 10:31 PM
How about Brussell Sprouts? I think of those as little cabbages. Love those, too!

michaeli98
02-27-2009, 11:00 PM
Hi, is it possible to repost key-retrieval script? Link is broken in the blog.

JSWolf
02-27-2009, 11:18 PM
I had a new version of the script to post anyway. Link in the blog post updated.
When you post the code to pastebin, what are you selecting as to how long the code should remain? The default is one month.

=X=
02-28-2009, 03:14 AM
I had a new version of the script to post anyway. Link in the blog post updated.

:bow2: that last script even fixed the older PDF encryption prior to the ADE. I thought I lost that book due to DRM, since Fictionwise expired that book without notice. They are no longer selling that book.

=X=

HarryT
02-28-2009, 08:57 AM
Totally unfair I have to work. I now know which script to download, have my key, have the library book in DE - if this works, no more buying books for me! To the library I will do (in cyberspace).


Please don't forget to delete the books once the checkout period has expired.

i♥cabbages
02-28-2009, 11:37 AM
Hi, is it possible to repost key-retrieval script? Link is broken in the blog.

Re-posted.

When you post the code to pastebin, what are you selecting as to how long the code should remain? The default is one month.

I'm selecting the "forever" option. I'm guessing that either someone is flagging these as abusive or the fact that they're so large is causing the pastbin admins to look at them. Anyone got any ideas for a better place to put these?

Spectrum
02-28-2009, 12:27 PM
worked like a charm. Liberated library ebook from it's shackles!

Thanks GENIUS!!!!

Spectrum
02-28-2009, 12:28 PM
Re-posted.



I'm selecting the "forever" option. I'm guessing that either someone is flagging these as abusive or the fact that they're so large is causing the pastbin admins to look at them. Anyone got any ideas for a better place to put these?


If mobileread could let you upload here...fingers crossed!!

pilotbob
02-28-2009, 12:32 PM
If mobileread could let you upload here...fingers crossed!!

MobileRead's policy is to not host or allow links to DRM removal tools which are clearly illegal in most countries. Any uploads of the kind will be quickly removed. Threads on DRM removal are tolerated however posts providing direct step-by-step directions will be edit and/or removed.

BOb - Moderator

JSWolf
02-28-2009, 12:34 PM
Re-posted.



I'm selecting the "forever" option. I'm guessing that either someone is flagging these as abusive or the fact that they're so large is causing the pastbin admins to look at them. Anyone got any ideas for a better place to put these?
I did put up a copy of MobiDeDRM.py 0.05 up on Pastebin and it's still there.

Where to put it up so it doesn't get taken down is a touch one. maybe you can get space on the same host that hosts ConvertLIT.

HarryT
02-28-2009, 12:52 PM
If mobileread could let you upload here...fingers crossed!!

Not in a million years, my friend. :).

owl123
02-28-2009, 01:24 PM
I did put up a copy of MobiDeDRM.py 0.05 up on Pastebin and it's still there.

Where to put it up so it doesn't get taken down is a touch one. maybe you can get space on the same host that hosts ConvertLIT.

Upload it to some sharing site like Rapidshare. If you care about legal issues then you can host it somewhere where DRM-removal is not illegal. BTW. ConvertLIT's site is located in Poland.

Jellby
02-28-2009, 01:37 PM
Not in a million years, my friend. :).

Hopefully, in less than a million years DRM will be a thing of the past and DRM removal will be legal... and money will fall from the trees.

Sydney's Mom
02-28-2009, 02:33 PM
Please don't forget to delete the books once the checkout period has expired.

Absolutely. We won't have libraries around if we abuse the privilege.

Debra

slayda
02-28-2009, 02:46 PM
How about Brussell Sprouts? I think of those as little cabbages. Love those, too!

I also think of them as little cabbages. Hate those too. :rolleyes:

RobbieClarken
02-28-2009, 02:56 PM
Absolutely. We won't have libraries around if we abuse the privilege.

Debra

Well the library will never know if you delete the files or not, so that action alone won't change libraries' behaviour regarding ebooks. Hence their is no rational reason to delete the books unless you think it is morally wrong to keep them or fear that someone might access your harddrive without your permission.

Sydney's Mom
02-28-2009, 03:22 PM
It is guilt (and I'm not even Catholic!) If someone got in trouble for decrypting library books and keeping them, even though I didn't get caught, it would bother me. I want to be able to use the library, guilt-free.

I have already read, AND DELETED, 2 of the 6 books I checked out last night. So you can tell what kind of trashy books I read. Now, I wish we could turn them back in before the 3 weeks are up - 6 books isn't enough for 3 weeks! Of course, I could read some "good" books in between.

RobbieClarken
02-28-2009, 03:50 PM
I have already read, AND DELETED, 2 of the 6 books I checked out last night. So you can tell what kind of trashy books I read. Now, I wish we could turn them back in before the 3 weeks are up - 6 books isn't enough for 3 weeks! Of course, I could read some "good" books in between.

Wow! I wish I could read that fast. Takes me over a week to read even a trashy novel.

With some libraries you can return digital edition books early. In the Library section of Digital Editions, try clicking the square in the top left corner of a book and see if it has a "Return Borrowed Item" option.

Sydney's Mom
02-28-2009, 04:27 PM
Hi, is it possible to repost key-retrieval script? Link is broken in the blog.

Just tried it - it is working now. Debra

Sydney's Mom
02-28-2009, 04:30 PM
Wow! I wish I could read that fast. Takes me over a week to read even a trashy novel.

With some libraries you can return digital edition books early. In the Library section of Digital Editions, try clicking the square in the top left corner of a book and see if it has a "Return Borrowed Item" option.

Thanks, I will try it.

Based on your "Now Reading" list, you aren't reading trashy enough novels to finish them in 2 hours. You need to dumb down your reading. That is what my DEAR husband calls it. He can read John Adams - I finish 50 books to every one he reads.

Sydney's Mom
02-28-2009, 04:38 PM
If you are using Adobe Digital Editions…

Open Adobe Digital Editions.
Select the 'Library View' icon (in the upper left corner).
The Adobe Digital Editions library is displayed.
Under the 'Bookshelves' heading, select 'Borrowed'.
Click the eBook you want to return.
Click the 'Item Options' arrow (in the upper left corner of the selected eBook).
Select 'Return Borrowed Item'.
Click 'Return' to verify that you want to return the title.
The eBook is removed from your account and returned to the library collection.

Amazing what you can find it you just look. Thanks, epiphany!

michaeli98
02-28-2009, 05:30 PM
Re-posted.


Thank you very much.

HarryT
03-01-2009, 04:51 AM
Well the library will never know if you delete the files or not, so that action alone won't change libraries' behaviour regarding ebooks. Hence their is no rational reason to delete the books unless you think it is morally wrong to keep them or fear that someone might access your harddrive without your permission.

How could you NOT consider it morally wrong to keep a library book?

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 05:16 AM
How could you NOT consider it morally wrong to keep a library book?

Because they aren't going to miss it. A few bits of information on my computer will be different but the library is no worse off. This is self evident because they will never even notice whether or not I deleted the book. If my action has no potential to cause anyone harm then I don't consider it morally wrong.

HarryT
03-01-2009, 05:23 AM
Because they aren't going to miss it. A few bits of information on my computer will be different but the library is no worse off. This is self evident because they will never even notice whether or not I deleted the book. If my action has no potential to cause anyone harm then I don't consider it morally wrong.

Sorry, but I disagree with you vehemently. The library has bought the book on the basis that it will be "loaned" to readers, not permanently kept. If you keep it, that is just as bad a downloading a copy of it illegally. It's a matter of trust - libraries do not exist to GIVE you books, but to LOAN them to you. If you violate that trust, you're putting the entire library eBook system at risk, and reinforcing the idea that users are all criminals who will steal if given half a chance. You damage everybody by doing this, and merely strengthen the idea in the minds of publishers that DRM systems are necessary.

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 05:58 AM
If you violate that trust, you're putting the entire library eBook system at risk, and reinforcing the idea that users are all criminals who will steal if given half a chance. You damage everybody's reputation for the sake of your own personal greed.

My point is that this argument only applies if the library or someone else is able to learn that you didn't delete the book. If everyone was to start bragging about how they are downloading and not deleting library ebooks then that could change the behaviour of libraries and publishers for the worse. But that is a separate issue to whether or not you hit the delete key (if you are going to keep your mouth shut about it).

Edit: One thing I do agree with you about is that if someone signs a contract with the library that stipulates they mustn't permanently download ebooks then they should keep their promise not to do this (even if the library would never learn what they do).

HarryT
03-01-2009, 06:01 AM
I'm afraid I consider that to be utterly immoral. But we must agree to differ.

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 06:09 AM
But we must agree to differ.

Agreed. :) When it comes to these issues I don't think people will ever change their positions, but I do find the discussions interesting.

HarryT
03-01-2009, 09:51 AM
Edit: One thing I do agree with you about is that if someone signs a contract with the library that stipulates they mustn't permanently download ebooks then they should keep their promise not to do this (even if the library would never learn what they do).

That is precisely my point: it's a breach of trust to "borrow" a book and then permanently keep it. Whether or not anyone "knows" that one has done so is irrelevent, at least in my code of ethics.

Valloric
03-01-2009, 09:51 AM
I'm afraid I consider that to be utterly immoral. But we must agree to differ.

I have to agree with Harry on this. When I saw people's reactions to this tool were: "Oh I'm sooo going to exploit my local library to get free books!", shivers went down my spine.

That's not the point of INEPT. The point is freeing yourself from the DRM imposed on your lawful purchases, not using it to get free books.

da_jane
03-01-2009, 09:55 AM
I have to agree. If you don't financially support the authors you enjoy, there will come a point in time that they won't write books for you to enjoy. There's nothing wrong with using decryption tools to preserve your own library, but to download the library books and keep those forever? I think it will eventually serve to hurt the entire publishing eco system.

tompe
03-01-2009, 10:07 AM
If people use the tool to comvert to other format to be able to read the books then the reasonable response from libraries is to make the books available in more formats.

I am also a bit surpised that people seem to make a distinction between removinge DRM from library books and downloading books from the darknet. If you are going to break the rules why not just download the book from the darknet?

Valloric
03-01-2009, 10:11 AM
I am also a bit surpised that people seem to make a distinction between removinge DRM from library books and downloading books from the darknet. If you are going to break the rules why not just download the book from the darknet?

You're absolutely right. There is no distinction.

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 10:22 AM
If you are going to break the rules why not just download the book from the darknet?

Because not all books are shared on the "darknet"?

HarryT
03-01-2009, 10:41 AM
If people use the tool to comvert to other format to be able to read the books then the reasonable response from libraries is to make the books available in more formats.

To the best of my knowledge, only the Adobe and MobiPocket DRM systems offer the capability of "time limiting". Even with your "DRM is evil" viewpoint, would you not accept that this is a legitimate use for DRM?

I am also a bit surpised that people seem to make a distinction between removinge DRM from library books and downloading books from the darknet. If you are going to break the rules why not just download the book from the darknet?

I see absolutely no difference.

Valloric
03-01-2009, 11:03 AM
Because not all books are shared on the "darknet"?

Let's back up a bit... you would de-DRM a library book and keep it only if you couldn't find one to steal from the darknet? Basically, you'd buy a book only if you couldn't illegaly acquire it from somewhere else?

Jellby
03-01-2009, 11:08 AM
Because they aren't going to miss it. A few bits of information on my computer will be different but the library is no worse off. This is self evident because they will never even notice whether or not I deleted the book. If my action has no potential to cause anyone harm then I don't consider it morally wrong.

It does not harm the library directly, but it can harm the authors. If you keep an ebook from the library, you will feel absolutely no need to purchase it in case you liked it. Whereas if you have to remove the ebook when it expires, you my feel it's more convenient to buy copy for yourself.

Of course, if you don't ever look again (and no one else does) at a file you should have deleted but didn't, there's no difference, but I don't think that's what you'd do.

It's a bit like having an affair and saying it's OK as long as your wife doesn't know...

Valloric
03-01-2009, 11:14 AM
It's a bit like having an affair and saying it's OK as long as your wife doesn't know...

Very good example!

tompe
03-01-2009, 11:14 AM
To the best of my knowledge, only the Adobe and MobiPocket DRM systems offer the capability of "time limiting". Even with your "DRM is evil" viewpoint, would you not accept that this is a legitimate use for DRM?


Not if it hinders you in easily quoting from a book for example.

If no books sold has DRM there is no reason to have a DRM for library books.

HarryT
03-01-2009, 11:22 AM
Not if it hinders you in easily quoting from a book for example.

It doesn't - at least not in Mobi format; I don't know about ePub.

If no books sold has DRM there is no reason to have a DRM for library books.

A library system has to have the capability of "checking out" books to a restricted number of users simultaneously. If they have only bought, say, 3 copies of the book, they need to be able to restrict it to 3 simultaneous lenders. Time-limiting DRM enables this; can you suggest a reasonable alternative?

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 11:33 AM
Let's back up a bit... you would de-DRM a library book and keep it only if you couldn't find one to steal from the darknet? Basically, you'd buy a book only if you couldn't illegaly acquire it from somewhere else?

My first preference is to buy the ebook. If that's not a possibility then it is usually more convenient to get a shared version from the darknet than find a library with the ebook that I want. If it were the other way around I'd gladly borrow the ebook rather than downloading it.

slayda
03-01-2009, 11:50 AM
How could you NOT consider it morally wrong to keep a library book?

Unfortunately, IMO what one sees as moral is very personal and will vary between individuals within any society as broad as our larger societies today. In addition it can vary vastly between societies. Personal morals are not base on any absolute sense of right and wrong but on what we individually and societally have been taught and personally accepted as right and wrong. My actions may seem immoral to you while I feel perfectly moral in those actions.

Note: My statements are not intended to make any moral judgments on library book usages. I'll leave that to your own sense of morality.

tompe
03-01-2009, 12:38 PM
A library system has to have the capability of "checking out" books to a restricted number of users simultaneously. If they have only bought, say, 3 copies of the book, they need to be able to restrict it to 3 simultaneous lenders. Time-limiting DRM enables this; can you suggest a reasonable alternative?

Just count the number of times you lend a book and have a minimum time for the lending. In that way you get the same effect as for paper books.

pilotbob
03-01-2009, 02:02 PM
My point is that this argument only applies if the library or someone else is able to learn that you didn't delete the book. If everyone was to start bragging about how they are downloading and not deleting library ebooks then that could change the behaviour of libraries and publishers for the worse. But that is a separate issue to whether or not you hit the delete key (if you are going to keep your mouth shut about it).


So, your defense is, it is ok to commit a crime if you don't/can't get caught. Thank God most people in civilized society don't agree with this.

Gee... so because you are posting it is ok, but aren't you everyone? Or part of everyone?


Edit: One thing I do agree with you about is that if someone signs a contract with the library that stipulates they mustn't permanently download ebooks then they should keep their promise not to do this (even if the library would never learn what they do).

You have a contract with the library I have no doubt. I assume you have a library card. You applied for it right? This is a "contract". Also, the fact that the ebooks are distributed with a DRM schemes that is designed to keep you from using the book past your checkout time should give you a hint that the do NOT expect or want you to have access to the book permanently.

You reasoning is flawed and self contradictory. Please delete library books once you are done with them. If you want it again, just check it out again!

BOb

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 02:32 PM
So, your defense is, it is ok to commit a crime if you don't/can't get caught.

Not at all! My defense is that any action which doesn't have the possibility of someone being harmed is not morally wrong.

You have a contract with the library I have no doubt. I assume you have a library card. You applied for it right? This is a "contract".

Unfortunately no libraries in my state offer OverDrive ebooks so I need to borrow a friend's library number. But yes, if you sign up with a library you should abide by their rules. And that would probably include not removing the DRM in the first place.

Sydney's Mom
03-01-2009, 03:14 PM
My contract with the library says I will take out no more than 6 books at a time, and will keep them out of circulation for no more than 21 days. If I keep the books and read them at my leisure and delete them when I am done, I have not breached my contract with the library. At the very least, it is a technical breach, and the damages are zero.

I would not buy these books if I could not get them from the library. This does not change my behavior from that with paper books. The books I really wanted to keep, I would buy (Harry Potter), and all the others I would get from the library. That is what I pay for with my taxes to the library. I am still buying the books I want to have permanently or don't want to wait for from the library (Southern Vampire Series) and getting the rest from the library. The fact that I am not reading the books as I get them is different, and perhaps I shouldn't do that, but I can't really think who I am hurting, as long as I have returned the books and delete them after I read them. The fact that I read them on a kindle rather than a Sony reader? Surely that is not the point. Libraries are funded to provide free books for a limited period of time. I could xerox a library book and read it later. I believe there is a copyright exception for personal use. This is the first time I have used my library since I got my kindle. It is better, from the library's perspective, that I use the library, because if I don't, I will not be willing to support it.

If libraries had an open format, I would have no problem reading the library books as I got them. I have 35 pages of books on my kindle, and the thought that I will read all of them before I die is ridiculous, especially since I keep buying books and downloading free (legal) books.

I know this is rationalization (after all, I am a lawyer) but since my behavior is now exactly the same as before I got my kindle, I am not troubled. Is it really immoral?

tompe
03-01-2009, 03:47 PM
So, your defense is, it is ok to commit a crime if you don't/can't get caught. Thank God most people in civilized society don't agree with this.


Well for some crimes they do agree with this. Certain kind of tax fraud for example. And jaywalking. Removing DRM. And so on.

But the argument was that it was OK if it did not have any bad consequences. And it is a good argument that you have to discus to see if it holds up or not.


You have a contract with the library I have no doubt. I assume you have a library card. You applied for it right? This is a "contract". Also, the fact that the ebooks are distributed with a DRM schemes that is designed to keep you from using the book past your checkout time should give you a hint that the do NOT expect or want you to have access to the book permanently.


I think the library would be very happy for you to have access to the book permanently if this did not lead to any bad consequences for the library.

joblack
03-01-2009, 04:12 PM
Who is still using Acrobat 6 or 7 will probably get an error message after opening the PDF. It still works but its the fault of the EBX_* custom properties.

For removing this adjust your

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
def serialize_object(self, obj):
if isinstance(obj, dict):
self.write('<<')
kc = re.compile(r'EBX_\w*')
for key, val in obj.items():
# remove the EBX_ custom properties (Adobe 6 is complaining about)
if kc.match(key):self.write('')
else:
self.write('/%s' % key)
self.serialize_object(val)
self.write('>>')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem is that some PDFs have aditional metadata so it still complains. I haven't found out yet how to filter these out.

Alisa
03-01-2009, 04:28 PM
My contract with the library says I will take out no more than 6 books at a time, and will keep them out of circulation for no more than 21 days. If I keep the books and read them at my leisure and delete them when I am done, I have not breached my contract with the library. At the very least, it is a technical breach, and the damages are zero.


I have a lot of sympathy with this position. I just cracked my first DRMed PDF library book so I could read it on my Kindle. I'm reading it now and will delete it when I'm done. I feel that I'm keeping within the spirit of the rule if not the letter. If I didn't read it for a few weeks I would be stretching that rule even further. I might still be comfortable with that but there's one thing I would want to know first. How does my library pay Overdrive for these books? Is it some sort of flat fee for the service or do they pay for each book I borrow? If they pay for each book and I end up downloading more books than I would normally with the idea that I will read them later, then they would end up paying more than they should if I end up not reading some of the books I borrow.

Alisa
03-01-2009, 04:31 PM
Unfortunately no libraries in my state offer OverDrive ebooks so I need to borrow a friend's library number. But yes, if you sign up with a library you should abide by their rules. And that would probably include not removing the DRM in the first place.

I wonder if that puts your friend in violation of their agreement. After all, you're not paying any taxes to support that library yet you are using their collection.

pilotbob
03-01-2009, 04:35 PM
I wonder if that puts your friend in violation of their agreement. After all, you're not paying any taxes to support that library yet you are using their collection.

[sarcasm mode]
It's ok... no one gets hurt and no one will find out.

BOb

Sydney's Mom
03-01-2009, 05:15 PM
Sarcasm aside, I suspect the library buys the book and uses overdrive for the distribution. I saw the monthly cost somewhere. I order paper books online the very same way. Those have to be manually delivered to my local library.

The library is not required to buy any more books because kindle owners can now check out library books. I can only checkout a book for a period of time, and then it is returned (I don't even have the option of keeping it out longer, via renewal or fine). I cannot check out a book if someone else has it checked out. Actually, the library has to submit useage statistics to the village board when asking for money, and my reuse of the library is going to look good on their statistics. And since they are already paying for overdrive, it isn't costing them a thing. Who exactly is the victim in this scenario? Again, if I sold the books, or created my own lending library, clearly the author can complain. But if my using the library causes the usership to go up, and the library to get more funding, which they will use buying more books, I just don't see who is harmed.

Now, there are some victimless crimes that are crimes because they involve behavior that we want to discourage. What behavior are we discouraging with me borrowing library books? And it is borrowing, even if the DRM is stripped. I do not keep the books. I am sitting at home, reading, instead of causing trouble out on the streets. What is not to love?

pilotbob
03-01-2009, 05:19 PM
What behavior are we discouraging with me borrowing library books? And it is borrowing, even if the DRM is stripped. I do not keep the books. I am sitting at home, reading, instead of causing trouble out on the streets. What is not to love?

None at all. But, having the book when you DON'T have them checked out is what we should discourage. Because if you have the book checked out... then I can't check it out. And, if you save it past that time, I have it checked out now and we are both reading it.

If you can't read it in the time frame you have it checked out, don't check it out. Check it out when you are going to read it, then delete it if you are done. The same thing that would happen if you kept the DRM on it intact.

BOb

Sydney's Mom
03-01-2009, 05:25 PM
Agreed. I am being greedy, because I am afraid that at some point I will not be able to borrow library books anymore, just like before this week.

However, I am still only reading the book once, and you are only reading the book once. Isn't that just the kind of time-shifting that VCRs were all about? And I am not fast-forwarding through any commercials in my library books.

RobbieClarken
03-01-2009, 05:30 PM
I wonder if that puts your friend in violation of their agreement. After all, you're not paying any taxes to support that library yet you are using their collection.

I don't think libraries have rules against borrowing a book and lending it to a friend (I do this all the time with paper books). It shouldn't matter if the friend is across the other side of the world as long as the book gets returned on time. ;)

Elfwreck
03-01-2009, 07:32 PM
Libraries are funded to provide free books for a limited period of time. I could xerox a library book and read it later. I believe there is a copyright exception for personal use.

Exactly.

This is precisely the legal right that carried the Betamax case: the right to copy a TV show to watch it at a different time from broadcast. That was deemed to be a non-infringing use of a copy-making device, and is the key reason VCRs were declared legal, and the foundation of modern "copy for personal use" rights.

The library can only provide so many "broadcasts" of an ebook at a time. If individuals can time-shift those "broadcasts" to read them later, that's no more copyright infringing than using a VCR to watch all your favorite TV shows on Sunday, rather than 1 hour every night.

It can become an illegal copy if given away... but maybe not. Giving away taped TV shows to a friend or family member has never been prosecuted; it's only when money changes hands that the main distributors start to become concerned. (Non-commercial copyright infringement, on its own, is not a crime in the US, but a tort--the wronged party must file suit to insist they've been wronged; if they don't, no harm is assumed. Like breach of contract, if nobody's complaining, it's assumed that no damage has been done.) (IANAL)

Removing the DRM, and keeping a copy, is no different from taping a TV show and keeping the tape. That the library, like the TV network, only provides the content for a limited time doesn't mean end users are required to only view the content in that time.

da_jane
03-01-2009, 07:49 PM
This is not correct. You could not xerox a library book and read it later. When you xerox a library book, you are creating a non legitimate copy of a book. It is not what the Betamax time shifting issue was about at all.

Time shifting was taking a legitimate copy of an episode and watching at a later time, not taking a copy to which you had no ownership of and using it at a later time. Further, it wasn't that time shifting was per se fair use, but that in the circumstances, it was fair use considering all the elements of fair use.

Do you think it would be okay to keep the copy of the library book for extended period of time? The library system rests on non possessory rights of borrowers.

Sydney's Mom
03-01-2009, 10:26 PM
I cannot download the free book at Harlequin. I tried the Adobe PDF, and the mobi. The other mobis in my account still download fine, but I believe that the reason I can't download this book is because I am downloading library books to my kindle.

I guess piracy gives you bad karma.:chinscratch:

AnemicOak
03-01-2009, 11:03 PM
I cannot download the free book at Harlequin. I tried the Adobe PDF, and the mobi. The other mobis in my account still download fine, but I believe that the reason I can't download this book is because I am downloading library books to my kindle.

I guess piracy gives you bad karma.:chinscratch:



There's definitely something wrong with the download. I was trying to help someone earlier and none of the three formats seem to want to download.

Sydney's Mom
03-02-2009, 02:30 PM
There's definitely something wrong with the download. I was trying to help someone earlier and none of the three formats seem to want to download.

You mean I'm not being punished? I'm only paranoid because they ARE out to get me.

Debra

AnemicOak
03-02-2009, 02:44 PM
You mean I'm not being punished? I'm only paranoid because they ARE out to get me.

Debra

Exactly ;)


(Oh, BTW the downloads seem to work now).

Sydney's Mom
03-02-2009, 02:58 PM
I have a lot of sympathy with this position. I just cracked my first DRMed PDF library book so I could read it on my Kindle. I'm reading it now and will delete it when I'm done. I feel that I'm keeping within the spirit of the rule if not the letter. If I didn't read it for a few weeks I would be stretching that rule even further. I might still be comfortable with that but there's one thing I would want to know first. How does my library pay Overdrive for these books? Is it some sort of flat fee for the service or do they pay for each book I borrow? If they pay for each book and I end up downloading more books than I would normally with the idea that I will read them later, then they would end up paying more than they should if I end up not reading some of the books I borrow.

But what if I am downloading the books today at a fee that is less than it will be in the future? And that I will live long enough to continue to download the maximum?

Alisa
03-02-2009, 03:46 PM
But what if I am downloading the books today at a fee that is less than it will be in the future? And that I will live long enough to continue to download the maximum?

LOL. I obviously worry too much about these fine points. I suppose if it were a fee-per-download model (which it sounds like it is) then you would only be harming the library if books you downloaded but didn't read outweighed the difference in price adjusted for inflation.

Ok, so here's my new ethical dilemma: Let's say each book is an individual purchase, like pbooks, and can be downloaded as many times as possible provided that they only have the allowable number of copies out at once. With PDF books, I have the ability to turn things back in early allowing more downloads over time than Mobipocket. The most truthful thing I can do is download the book, read it and return it when done. If I have stripped the DRM, I don't have to retain the license to read it. Even if I took a week to read it, I could turn it back in right away and free it up for someone else. However this could cause the library to inadvertently violate its license for the book but at the same time it might increase usage of the ebook service allowing them to focus more on the enterprise, get more funding and purchase even more books.

joblack
03-02-2009, 03:54 PM
This is not correct. You could not xerox a library book and read it later. When you xerox a library book, you are creating a non legitimate copy of a book. It is not what the Betamax time shifting issue was about at all.

Its legal to xerox a book (at least on Germany). If you buy a xerox machine a part of the price is for the book industry.

Sydney's Mom
03-02-2009, 08:07 PM
This is just too confusing. Uncle

JSWolf
03-02-2009, 09:48 PM
Its legal to xerox a book (at least on Germany). If you buy a xerox machine a part of the price is for the book industry.
You buy a xerox machine to photocopy stuff. You don't xerox it as that is not a verb.

Alisa
03-02-2009, 10:19 PM
Verb or not, I found his meaning quite clear.

desertgrandma
03-02-2009, 10:33 PM
You buy a xerox machine to photocopy stuff. You don't xerox it as that is not a verb.

Actually, it can be used as a verb, Jon. from dictionary.com

"Xer·ox (zîr'ŏks) Pronunciation Key
A trademark used for a photocopying process or machine employing xerography. This trademark often occurs in print in lowercase as a verb and noun: "Letters you send should be xeroxed after you sign them" (Progressive Architecture). "He has four or five sheets of foolscap, xeroxes, I see, of court documents" (Scott Turow).
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source
xerox

noun
1. a copy made by a xerographic printer
2. a duplicator (trade mark Xerox) that copies graphic matter by the action of light on an electrically charged photoconductive insulating surface in which the latent image is developed with a resinous powder

verb
1. reproduce by xerography [syn: photocopy]
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Cite This Source "

Patricia
03-02-2009, 10:40 PM
And there are signs above the photocopiers in the university where I work, warning us against copying more than one chapter from each book, on account of copyright regulations.

TheJohnNewton
03-03-2009, 01:58 PM
DRM, copyrights, varying countries, oh my!

owl123
03-03-2009, 04:10 PM
And there are signs above the photocopiers in the university where I work, warning us against copying more than one chapter from each book, on account of copyright regulations.

Different countries have different copyright and fair use regulations.

elena
03-04-2009, 05:30 AM
Its legal to xerox a book (at least on Germany). If you buy a xerox machine a part of the price is for the book industry.

It is not in Italy. You can copy up to a small percentage of the book.
You can't scan a book either. A law states you must have the publisher's authorisation to scan one of its book, though another low states that a publisher cannot grant it because it doesn't own digital rights on the book.
I deduce that means you can't scan a book :chinscratch:

joblack
03-04-2009, 08:57 AM
It is not in Italy. You can copy up to a small percentage of the book.
You can't scan a book either. A law states you must have the publisher's authorisation to scan one of its book, though another low states that a publisher cannot grant it because it doesn't own digital rights on the book.
I deduce that means you can't scan a book :chinscratch:

Well, despite the fact that the copied material will be probably more expensive than the actual book ...

slayda
03-04-2009, 10:52 AM
I've always wondered, if a person has an eidetic (photographic) memory, goes to the library and flips through all pages of a book (i.e. places them in his memory) and then goes home to peruse the content of that book, has he violated the author's copyright? Or what if he "reads" the book from memory (instead of directly from the printed book) to someone else, maybe to an audience who pays him a fee for doing so?

Enquiring minds want to know!

yekim54
03-04-2009, 02:52 PM
Or what if he "reads" the book from memory (instead of directly from the printed book) to someone else, maybe to an audience who pays him a fee for doing so?
Or maybe he can become a valuable consultant for the CIA/NSA like Chuck Bartowski.

tweaked
03-05-2009, 12:36 PM
since adobe's legal lizards have done their DMCA thing with cabbages' site and the orig. pastebin link from google cache is now broken as well, could somebody perhaps send me the script in question?

my email is steeze (at) gmail.com.

thanks!!!

joblack
03-05-2009, 04:10 PM
The scripts are still on the site ...

tweaked
03-05-2009, 08:56 PM
from what i can tell, they've been removed following a DMCA complaint from the link (http://i-u2665-cabbages.blogspot.com/2009/02/circumventing-adobe-adept-drm-for-pdf.html) that started off the thread. though if there's another spot where they're hiding i'd love to know!

joblack
03-05-2009, 09:03 PM
You're right - I accidently checked the epub variant.

It took Adobe quite a time to realize it ... I think this censorship will distribute the script even further ...

AnemicOak
03-05-2009, 09:32 PM
It took Adobe quite a time to realize it ... I think this censorship will distribute the script even further ...

I wonder if Adobe will attempt to change their DRM to counter this like they did after the Dmitry Sklyarov/Elcomsoft deal back in 2001.

joblack
03-05-2009, 09:55 PM
To change a DRM system needs resources and time. Even if they change it you can easily search for it.

I haven't read anything in the mass media about the hack so I / they think it is a local problem.

HarryT
03-06-2009, 04:18 AM
You're right - I accidently checked the epub variant.

It took Adobe quite a time to realize it ... I think this censorship will distribute the script even further ...

A DMCA takedown request is not "censorship". It is a legitimate request for removal of illegal materials. Distribution of tools to circumvent DRM is a crime under the DMCA.

joblack
03-06-2009, 08:25 AM
A DMCA takedown request is not "censorship". It is a legitimate request for removal of illegal materials. Distribution of tools to circumvent DRM is a crime under the DMCA.

Well, in the Third Reich being a Jew was a crime.

Thou it doesn't say anything if it is right despite being 'a crime' and is not really an argument for the DMCA.

tompe
03-06-2009, 08:36 AM
A DMCA takedown request is not "censorship". It is a legitimate request for removal of illegal materials. Distribution of tools to circumvent DRM is a crime under the DMCA.

No it is a request to remove some material that IS CLAIMED to fall into a specific category. It is common that DMCA notices is sent as a threat and that they lie about the status of the material they want to be removed.

HarryT
03-06-2009, 10:02 AM
No it is a request to remove some material that IS CLAIMED to fall into a specific category. It is common that DMCA notices is sent as a threat and that they lie about the status of the material they want to be removed.

That's as may be, but in this case, this is undeniably a DRM-circumvention tool, and therefore the takedown notice from a US-based server was entirely lawful and appropriate.

desertgrandma
03-06-2009, 10:08 AM
Well, in the Third Reich being a Jew was a crime.

Thou it doesn't say anything if it is right despite being 'a crime' and is not really an argument for the DMCA.

Thats a really stupid comparison.

tompe
03-06-2009, 10:21 AM
That's as may be, but in this case, this is undeniably a DRM-circumvention tool, and therefore the takedown notice from a US-based server was entirely lawful and appropriate.

That has not been tested in court.

HarryT
03-06-2009, 11:26 AM
Doesn't matter what you or I think; the owners of the server obviously felt it to be appropriate to remove the material.

joblack
03-06-2009, 11:38 AM
Doesn't matter what you or I think; the owners of the server obviously felt it to be appropriate to remove the material.

The script is still on the server, only the link isn't available anymore ...

Elfwreck
03-06-2009, 11:49 AM
That's as may be, but in this case, this is undeniably a DRM-circumvention tool, and therefore the takedown notice from a US-based server was entirely lawful and appropriate.

The takedown notice was indeed lawful.

That doesn't mean the content was illegal, only that the copyright owner(s) believed it infringes on their copyright, and were willing to say so in a way that they can be held legally accountable for.

The way DMCA takedown notices work is,

Copyright owner files complaint with ISP or other provider,
Content is removed for 2 weeks,
Content poster has opportunity to object,
If s/he objects, s/he gives name & address to copyright owner, so that copyright owner can file suit
Copyright owner has two weeks to take legal action, otherwise the content goes back up.

Many people don't object, and their content is just removed. Some don't object because they don't understand how it's supposed to work, and some are actually infringing and got caught, and some don't want to give their name & address to the party on the other end (who does NOT have to reveal legal contact info to the individual, only to the ISP/web host).

A DMCA takedown notice, even a legit one, is not an indication of a crime. It's an announcement that someone *thinks* something illegal has happened. Since copyright infringement is a blurry thing, the illegality has to be determined in court.

And there's supposed to be penalties for malicious misuse of DMCA takedowns, which have not been enforced. (Like when the SFWA told Scribd.com to remove hundreds of science fiction stories, claiming they were infringing on copyrights... including stories released under Creative Commons, and stories by authors who had not authorized the SFWA to legally represent them.)

HarryT
03-06-2009, 12:00 PM
The takedown notice was indeed lawful.

That doesn't mean the content was illegal, only that the copyright owner(s) believed it infringes on their copyright, and were willing to say so in a way that they can be held legally accountable for.


Do you think this was a "copyright infringement" takedown? I'd have thought it much more likely to be a "this is an DRM-circumvention tool" takedown. I can't see whose copyrights might be infringed by a PERL script.

joblack
03-06-2009, 12:03 PM
I can't see whose copyrights might be infringed by a PERL script.

It's a Python script.

HarryT
03-06-2009, 12:03 PM
Apologies - I always get those two mixed up!

joblack
03-06-2009, 01:13 PM
Apologies - I always get those two mixed up!

Well, they couldn't be farer away. Perl was invented by a linguist guy, Python by a mathematician. The have a total different approach and style.

Anyway, that probably won't change that DMCA stuff.

Valloric
03-06-2009, 01:17 PM
Well, in the Third Reich being a Jew was a crime.

Danger, Will Robinson.

Apologies - I always get those two mixed up!

There's an uncomfortable number of people in the world that would react very badly to such a faux pas. :)

HarryT
03-06-2009, 01:19 PM
They both start in "P" and I don't use either. I'm a C++ man, myself.

nrapallo
03-06-2009, 01:19 PM
Well, they couldn't be farer away. Perl was invented by a linguist guy, Python by a mathematician. The have a total different approach and style.

Anyway, that probably won't change that DMCA stuff.

:chinscratch: Strange, I like Perl better than Python and I'm a mathematican at heart who loves ebooks! :dunno:

pilotbob
03-06-2009, 01:20 PM
They both start in "P" and I don't use either. I'm a C++ man, myself.

Without the "P" you are left with "LAM".

BOb

amjbrown
03-07-2009, 07:18 AM
As at this morning, putting the full URL into Google gives you the option of downloading the cached version, which still contains the pastebin links. It all works a treat for me :)

Now if I could only work out what I am doing wrong with pdftrim in Calibre...

joblack
03-07-2009, 10:00 AM
:chinscratch: Strange, I like Perl better than Python and I'm a mathematican at heart who loves ebooks! :dunno:

Well, you like what you're emotionally attached to and not necessary what's the best matching choice. Have you tried Python? Python wasn't an instant love for me but if you work with it a little bit you enjoy the options.

E.g. I like my C64 but in todays standard it's not that hightec machine ... :p

joblack
03-07-2009, 10:05 AM
As at this morning, putting the full URL into Google gives you the option of downloading the cached version, which still contains the pastebin links. It all works a treat for me :)

Now if I could only work out what I am doing wrong with pdftrim in Calibre...

Bad person, HarryT will kick your ... :rofl:

nrapallo
03-07-2009, 11:42 AM
Well, you like what you're emotionally attached to and not necessary what's the best matching choice. Have you tried Python?

Yes, I've worked a bit with Python when coding plugins for ashkulz's Impserve proxy-server program which allows ebookwise hardware readers to surf the internet and download content.

I also tweaked PDFRead, originally written by ashkluz in Python, but did that while learning the language. I tend to think linearly and not like OOP. :smack: I think its just me. :snicker:

Python wasn't an instant love for me but if you work with it a little bit you enjoy the options.

E.g. I like my C64 but in todays standard it's not that hightec machine ... :p

Funny thing, ashkulz too kept telling me that I would love using Python, but I didn't see it that way. I let him do all the hard coding; I just tweaked things! :grin2:

Oh, BTW, the C64 was nice, but the real ass-kicking multi-tasking graphics system was the Amiga (and all within 512K RAM)!!!

joblack
03-07-2009, 01:33 PM
Funny thing, ashkulz too kept telling me that I would love using Python, but I didn't see it that way. I let him do all the hard coding; I just tweaked things! :grin2:

Oh, BTW, the C64 was nice, but the real ass-kicking multi-tasking graphics system was the Amiga (and all within 512K RAM)!!!

I'm an old fashion guy on one side. I used MS-DOS despite Win95 was out and first I blame the new stuff as 'gay' or other things.

After some time I recognized that I'm just too comfortable to change my opinion.

If it is doing the job it's fine. I even like Perl sometimes because you can impress some non-perler with some fancy one liners ;).

amjbrown
03-07-2009, 04:04 PM
Bad person, HarryT will kick your ... :rofl:

I didn't realise being a noob at calibre would get my ... kicked :(

Patricia
03-07-2009, 04:48 PM
I'm an old fashion guy on one side. I used MS-DOS despite Win95 was out and first I blame the new stuff as 'gay' or other things.


"Gay"??!!
What an extraordinary way of describing it. Some of our gay members may have something to say about that.

tompe
03-07-2009, 05:04 PM
"Gay"??!!
What an extraordinary way of describing it. Some of our gay members may have something to say about that.

It seems it can mean lame also.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2008/mar/11/shouldwebeworriedabout


But the OED also notes another change taking place in the US as early as 1978, when it becomes a description of something "Foolish, stupid, socially inappropriate or disapproved of; 'lame'."

FizzyWater
03-07-2009, 08:19 PM
"Gay"??!!
What an extraordinary way of describing it. Some of our gay members may have something to say about that.

It seems it can mean lame also.

There's a big ad campaign going on the US to try to get the "gay=lame" terminology out of common usage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS0GVOQPs0

I'll admit, it makes me cringe to hear it, just like when someone says something is "retarded".

slayda
03-07-2009, 09:39 PM
I guess it has been a long time since gay = happy (like it did when I was growing up).:o:angry:

wallcraft
03-08-2009, 05:15 AM
How does my library pay Overdrive for these books? Is it some sort of flat fee for the service or do they pay for each book I borrow? Lending library ebooks seem to be treated the same way as physical books. The library buys N copies and these can be lent to N readers at a time. If an ebook is in demand, they might buy more copies. There may be an additional cost per check-out for an ebook, but if so I have not seen it referenced on OverDrive's web site.

A difference to physical books is that each ebook format (MOBI, PDF, ePub) must be bought separately. So a library could have 3 copies of an ebook but if only one is MOBI and it has been checked out a second MOBI reader will be shut out until the ebook is returned (after a fixed time with MOBI) even though there are 2 PDF copies available.

HarryT
03-08-2009, 05:32 AM
I guess it has been a long time since gay = happy (like it did when I was growing up).:o:angry:

I still use the word to mean that. I refuse to let a perfectly good word be "hijacked" into having only one meaning.

Sparrow
03-08-2009, 06:22 AM
I refuse to let a perfectly good word be "hijacked" into having only one meaning.

Me too!
When I'm not too busy using my ereader that is. ;)

HarryT
03-08-2009, 06:27 AM
I'm feeling very gay this morning. The sun is shining and the birds are singing right outside my window. Oh, and I've just spotted that my daffodils are in flower, too. What reason not be gay on such a day? :)

Patricia
03-08-2009, 10:20 AM
I agree with you Harry. There's no problem with a word having two meanings.
As far as I'm concerned gay can mean either light-hearted or refer to a person who is attached to people of the same sex.

But the tendency to use the word as a synonym for lame is different. It is an antonym of the gay=light-hearted meaning, so causes confusion.
Even worse, it is a pejorative term, so looks like an attempt to drive the gay people back into the closet.

I belive that I've already converted Nietzsche's The Gay Science. Perhaps I'll look for some more light-heartedly gay literature.

montsnmags
03-08-2009, 10:33 AM
"Gay"??!!
What an extraordinary way of describing it. Some of our gay members may have something to say about that.

Oh, I don't know. Perhaps joblack just means the new stuff looked like Jeff Bezos with lipstick on:

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?p=190495#post190495

It sounds like a pretty lame description to me though. ;)

Cheers,
Marc

JSWolf
03-08-2009, 10:45 AM
A DMCA takedown request is not "censorship". It is a legitimate request for removal of illegal materials. Distribution of tools to circumvent DRM is a crime under the DMCA.
But, Adobe has to realize that it's LEGAL to remove their DRM from PDFs. In Adobe Acrobat is a feature that's called Read Out Loud. This feature is disabled because Adobe's DRM does not allow the PDF document to even be loaded into Acrobat. Now, if you strip off the DRM, the Read Out Loud feature may work depending on the type of PDF. So what Adobe is doing is preventing disabled people from remove the DRM of PDF so they can assess Reading Out Loud. This is wrong and I would love to see this go to court and watch Adobe lose big time.

HarryT
03-08-2009, 11:13 AM
But, Adobe has to realize that it's LEGAL to remove their DRM from PDFs. In Adobe Acrobat is a feature that's called Read Out Loud. This feature is disabled because Adobe's DRM does not allow the PDF document to even be loaded into Acrobat. Now, if you strip off the DRM, the Read Out Loud feature may work depending on the type of PDF. So what Adobe is doing is preventing disabled people from remove the DRM of PDF so they can assess Reading Out Loud. This is wrong and I would love to see this go to court and watch Adobe lose big time.

But, as you are very well aware, Jon, the DMCA exemption says that you are only allowed to remove that DRM if NO eBook version exists for which reading aloud is enabled. As long as the Kindle 2 can read aloud a book, it is not legal to remove that DRM. That's what you yourself have been telling us for I don't know how long, so I'm a little surprised that it's slipped your mind!

TallMomof2
03-09-2009, 11:09 AM
Whatever happened to Fortran 77? Those were the days... punch cards and waiting hours or days for printouts.

joblack
03-09-2009, 11:23 AM
"Gay"??!!
What an extraordinary way of describing it. Some of our gay members may have something to say about that.

I have nothing against gay people. In my experience they normally want to give me a massage and secretly want to take advantage of me.

This is kind of creepy and I heart this request a lot.

I let them alone if they don't hit on me anymore. :cool:

Jellby
03-09-2009, 11:51 AM
Whatever happened to Fortran 77? Those were the days... punch cards and waiting hours or days for printouts.

I still use it (the language, not the punch cards) ;)

Shaggy
03-09-2009, 03:37 PM
Please don't forget to delete the books once the checkout period has expired.

Also don't forget that when you "delete" a file on your PC, it doesn't actually remove the bits that make up that file, it just removes a pointer to them from the filesystem. It's fairly trivial to recover deleted files on most PCs. The only way to REALLY delete your copy of those digital 1's and 0's which represent that library ebook is to destroy your hard drive.

So to be fully legal/moral you need to destroy your hard drive each time one of your "loans" expires, or do a low-level wipe of the hard drive and reinstall your OS. Either that or realize that all this "equating digital files with physical property" stuff is just nonsense.

Shaggy
03-09-2009, 04:00 PM
That's as may be, but in this case, this is undeniably a DRM-circumvention tool, and therefore the takedown notice from a US-based server was entirely lawful and appropriate.

No, actually a DMCA takedown is a request for removal of copyright infringing materials. This is actually a misuse of a DMCA takedown.

Yes, distributing the tools is a crime under DMCA, but the scripts themselves are not copyrighted by Adobe so a DMCA takedown does not apply. In other words, in order to issue a DMCA takedown, Adobe has to claim that they own the copyright to the circumvention tools, which they obviously do not. A takedown is not a "free for all" to get rid of anything illegal. It's specifically to remove things that you claim are infringing on your copyrights.

If Adobe has a problem with the scripts, they need to prosecute, not issue a takedown.

Elfwreck
03-09-2009, 04:02 PM
Do you think this was a "copyright infringement" takedown? I'd have thought it much more likely to be a "this is an DRM-circumvention tool" takedown. I can't see whose copyrights might be infringed by a PERL script.

Same issue; the takedown notice isn't an announcement of guilt, it's an announcement of belief of guilt on the part of someone not legally qualified to decide.

DMCA takedowns exist to allow rights holders (of various types) to prevent further damage/loss before filing suit. If they don't decide to file, the loss/damage is presumed to be nonexistant, and the content is free to return.

DMCA 1201(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected.—
(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.

The person claimed to have a circumvention tool has the right to challenge that claim; that a tool obviously removes DRM doesn't automatically make it illegal. (If it's only used, or mostly used, to remove DRM to allow people to use their purchased files on a rebooted computer, no copyright law has been broken, and the tool is legit.)

Shaggy
03-09-2009, 04:04 PM
Do you think this was a "copyright infringement" takedown? I'd have thought it much more likely to be a "this is an DRM-circumvention tool" takedown.

There's no such thing as a "DRM-circumvention tool" takedown.


I can't see whose copyrights might be infringed by a PERL script.


The developer who wrote the script. But that's obviously not Adobe.

Sonist
03-09-2009, 04:07 PM
Kind of on topic.

I am thinking of purchasing a PDF version of a travel guide, available from Lonely Planet.

The only reason I'd purchase it, though, is if I can be certain I can remove the DRM, so I can view it on my iRex (and attempt to convert it to mobi for my K2.) I need the file I end up with to be searchable.

Is there any reason why the scripts would not work on a LP PDF?

Alisa
03-09-2009, 04:36 PM
I thought the Lonely Planet stuff was DRM-free. I could have sworn I bought one awhile back and converted it just fine. Have they started adding DRM recently?

Sonist
03-09-2009, 04:48 PM
I thought the Lonely Planet stuff was DRM-free. I could have sworn I bought one awhile back and converted it just fine. Have they started adding DRM recently?

Oh, I haven't bought it yet - I just assumed it was DRM-ed. I guess I shouldn't always assume the worst:-)

Is it the same with Frommer's? The definitely list printing and copying restrictions.

Sydney's Mom
03-09-2009, 05:36 PM
Also don't forget that when you "delete" a file on your PC, it doesn't actually remove the bits that make up that file, it just removes a pointer to them from the filesystem. It's fairly trivial to recover deleted files on most PCs. The only way to REALLY delete your copy of those digital 1's and 0's which represent that library ebook is to destroy your hard drive.

So to be fully legal/moral you need to destroy your hard drive each time one of your "loans" expires, or do a low-level wipe of the hard drive and reinstall your OS. Either that or realize that all this "equating digital files with physical property" stuff is just nonsense.

How about I just promised to never read them again and pretend they are gone. For my purposes (with my computer skills), they are.

amjbrown
03-10-2009, 07:54 AM
How about I just promised to never read them again and pretend they are gone

You are asking copyright guardians to *trust* you! Having lived through the evolution of the digital music market, that is something they struggle with :)

Valloric
03-10-2009, 09:49 AM
The only way to REALLY delete your copy of those digital 1's and 0's which represent that library ebook is to destroy your hard drive.

This is absolutely ridiculous.

You can just overwrite those ones and zeros, and they'll be gone just the same. Run any disk defragmenter and it will probably overwrite those platter clusters.

Shaggy
03-10-2009, 01:11 PM
This is absolutely ridiculous.

You can just overwrite those ones and zeros, and they'll be gone just the same. Run any disk defragmenter and it will probably overwrite those platter clusters.

There are data recovery techniques that can get those ones and zeros back even if you overwrite them.

However, I wasn't really being serious though. Just pointing out how silly the whole comparison is when trying to think of digital data in physical property terms. That's why all sorts of nonsense happens when we try to apply laws and/or business models from physical property to digital data. You're right, it is absolutely ridiculous.

Valloric
03-10-2009, 04:12 PM
There are data recovery techniques that can get those ones and zeros back even if you overwrite them.

This works only sometimes, and in specific situations.

Sonist
03-10-2009, 05:00 PM
This works only sometimes, and in specific situations.

I think Shaggy is making a different point....

Valloric
03-10-2009, 10:32 PM
I think Shaggy is making a different point....

I know, but still... a bad argument bugs the hell out of me.

JSWolf
03-10-2009, 10:56 PM
Kind of on topic.

I am thinking of purchasing a PDF version of a travel guide, available from Lonely Planet.

The only reason I'd purchase it, though, is if I can be certain I can remove the DRM, so I can view it on my iRex (and attempt to convert it to mobi for my K2.) I need the file I end up with to be searchable.

Is there any reason why the scripts would not work on a LP PDF?
If you are planning on converting the travel guide PDF for your Kindle, forget it. All that will happen is that it will end up being a real mess.

JSWolf
03-10-2009, 10:59 PM
This is absolutely ridiculous.

You can just overwrite those ones and zeros, and they'll be gone just the same. Run any disk defragmenter and it will probably overwrite those platter clusters.
The only way to be 100% sure the bits to that eBook are 100% gone is to overwrite all of them 9 times.

AnemicOak
03-10-2009, 11:00 PM
The only way to be 100% sure the bits to that eBook are 100% gone is to overwrite all of them 9 times.

But only if you do it while standing on your head. ;)

Valloric
03-10-2009, 11:16 PM
But only if you do it while standing on your head. ;)

... and with your finger up a cat's ass.

Sydney's Mom
03-11-2009, 01:39 PM
... and with your finger up a cat's ass.

Well, since I don't have a cat (allergic) I guess I am back to square one. I hope the CPL doesn't turn me in. Wait, it is Chicago! I will probably be elected to public office.

Shaggy
03-11-2009, 03:26 PM
I don't have a cat either, but apparently a dog will work fine... as long as it's properly licensed. It's certainly not something you'd be allowed to do without the breeder's permission. Just think of what would happen if people started using pets for purposes other than what the breeder was financially compensated for. If people started sticking finger's up their pets asses willy nilly, society as we know it would come to an end... or at the very least get stuck behind!

Sydney's Mom
03-11-2009, 03:51 PM
I don't have a cat either, but apparently a dog will work fine... as long as it's properly licensed. It's certainly not something you'd be allowed to do without the breeder's permission. Just think of what would happen if people started using pets for purposes other than what the breeder was financially compensated for. If people started sticking finger's up their pets asses willy nilly, society as we know it would come to an end... or at the very least get stuck behind!

Hey, now my monitor is all yucky!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

slayda
03-11-2009, 04:21 PM
And all the children would die of starvation 'cause who could eat with cat & dog poop all over their fingers.

RickyMaveety
03-11-2009, 05:50 PM
I eat stuff with cat and dog poop all over my fingers every day. Granted, it's probably just a microscopic amount, but I'm sure it's there and it hasn't killed me yet!! :rofl:

RickyMaveety
03-11-2009, 06:07 PM
The takedown notice was indeed lawful.

That doesn't mean the content was illegal, only that the copyright owner(s) believed it infringes on their copyright, and were willing to say so in a way that they can be held legally accountable for.

The way DMCA takedown notices work is,

Copyright owner files complaint with ISP or other provider,
Content is removed for 2 weeks,
Content poster has opportunity to object,
If s/he objects, s/he gives name & address to copyright owner, so that copyright owner can file suit
Copyright owner has two weeks to take legal action, otherwise the content goes back up.

Many people don't object, and their content is just removed. Some don't object because they don't understand how it's supposed to work, and some are actually infringing and got caught, and some don't want to give their name & address to the party on the other end (who does NOT have to reveal legal contact info to the individual, only to the ISP/web host).

A DMCA takedown notice, even a legit one, is not an indication of a crime. It's an announcement that someone *thinks* something illegal has happened. Since copyright infringement is a blurry thing, the illegality has to be determined in court.

And there's supposed to be penalties for malicious misuse of DMCA takedowns, which have not been enforced. (Like when the SFWA told Scribd.com to remove hundreds of science fiction stories, claiming they were infringing on copyrights... including stories released under Creative Commons, and stories by authors who had not authorized the SFWA to legally represent them.)

Here's my question, why is it that the penalties for malicious misuse of DMCA takedowns are not being enforced?? Any one, at any time is allowed to effectively cripple a site on a completely false accusation and there is no recourse??

Please someone explain to me when the US became a haven for witch hunters.

desertgrandma
03-11-2009, 06:08 PM
I eat stuff with cat and dog poop all over my fingers every day. Granted, it's probably just a microscopic amount, but I'm sure it's there and it hasn't killed me yet!! :rofl:

ick! ick! ick!!!

(runs and washes hands)

Anyone want a cat? Very lovable with those he loves...........unfortunately he loves no one!
:rofl:

RickyMaveety
03-11-2009, 06:12 PM
ick! ick! ick!!!

(runs and washes hands)

Anyone want a cat? Very lovable with those he loves...........unfortunately he loves no one!
:rofl:

In other words, your basic cat. :)

pilotbob
03-11-2009, 06:14 PM
In other words, your basic cat. :)

Cat's love me. Then again, being a bird, I don't much care for them.

BOb

desertgrandma
03-11-2009, 06:14 PM
In other words, your basic cat. :)


Well, if you are going to be pedantic........:p

JSWolf
03-11-2009, 06:21 PM
Can we get back on topic please?

tompe
03-11-2009, 06:46 PM
Here's my question, why is it that the penalties for malicious misuse of DMCA takedowns are not being enforced?? Any one, at any time is allowed to effectively cripple a site on a completely false accusation and there is no recourse??

Please someone explain to me when the US became a haven for witch hunters.

That I have wondered also.

Also since the strategy from organizations like IFPI is to frighten people and every time somebody acts frightened (e.g. by pointing out possible illegalities in this forum) then they are caving in to the extortion from these kind of organizations.

RickyMaveety
03-11-2009, 06:51 PM
That I have wondered also.

Also since the strategy from organizations like IFPI is to frighten people and every time somebody acts frightened (e.g. by pointing out possible illegalities in this forum) then they are caving in to the extortion from these kind of organizations.

And, that's exactly how I see it. It is extortion on a huge scale. It chaps my hide to think that my government is going to allow corporations to stifle free expression with threats that have no basis in law.

Sonist
03-11-2009, 07:40 PM
If you are planning on converting the travel guide PDF for your Kindle, forget it. All that will happen is that it will end up being a real mess.

Thanks, JSWolf. It sounds right, I tried, but haven't really been able to do a decent conversion from PDF, to something like mobi or epub.

Does anyone have any experience with travel book PDF, if they are searchable on something like the iLiad? Reflowable?

JSWolf
03-11-2009, 07:42 PM
Thanks, JSWolf. It sounds right, I tried, but haven't really been able to do a decent conversion from PDF, to something like mobi or epub.

Does anyone have any experience with travel book PDF, if they are searchable on something like the iLiad? Reflowable?
They should be good enough as is on an iLiad. Check out the iLiad forums on MR first and see what's what with an iLiad.

Sydney's Mom
03-11-2009, 07:57 PM
Can we get back on topic please?

Awwwww, do we HAVE to? This is the most fun I have had at work in quite awhile!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

JSWolf
03-12-2009, 10:09 AM
Awwwww, do we HAVE to? This is the most fun I have had at work in quite awhile!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
So you enjoy poo? :chinscratch:

Shaggy
03-12-2009, 12:07 PM
Here's my question, why is it that the penalties for malicious misuse of DMCA takedowns are not being enforced?? Any one, at any time is allowed to effectively cripple a site on a completely false accusation and there is no recourse??

Please someone explain to me when the US became a haven for witch hunters.

When corporate lobbyists started writing laws.

Shaggy
03-12-2009, 12:10 PM
Does anyone have any experience with travel book PDF, if they are searchable on something like the iLiad? Reflowable?

I don't know anything about travel book PDFs, but the iLiad does not support searching or reflowing PDFs.

JSWolf
03-12-2009, 12:13 PM
Here's my question, why is it that the penalties for malicious misuse of DMCA takedowns are not being enforced?? Any one, at any time is allowed to effectively cripple a site on a completely false accusation and there is no recourse??

Please someone explain to me when the US became a haven for witch hunters.
I have read some of The Dark Side by Jayne Mayer. It has led me to the following conclusion. The DMCA got signed because George W. Bush was a spineless jellyfish and listened to the bad advice of the people he surrounded himself with. And Dick Chaney was already quite paranoid before 9/11 and 9/11 just put him over the top. So between the people Bush had around him and Chaney, the USA had no chance.

If I ever was to get a chance to talk to Obama, I would ask him about repealing the DMCA.

RobbieClarken
03-12-2009, 12:29 PM
If I ever was to get a chance to talk to Obama, I would ask him about repealing the DMCA.

Given some of Obama's nominations to the justice department (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10133425-38.html), I don't think it would do much good.

JSWolf
03-12-2009, 12:32 PM
Still, if nobody mentions it to the President, nothing definitely will happen.

RobbieClarken
03-12-2009, 01:56 PM
Still, if nobody mentions it to the President, nothing definitely will happen.

Heh, that makes the US sound like a dictatorship. I think you would have a better chance appealing to your representative than speaking personally to the president. It's a worrisome sign that people in the US now see the executive branch and not the congress as being responsible for legislation.

Shaggy
03-12-2009, 03:17 PM
Heh, that makes the US sound like a dictatorship. I think you would have a better chance appealing to your representative than speaking personally to the president. It's a worrisome sign that people in the US now see the executive branch and not the congress as being responsible for legislation.

You're right, that is one worrisome sign. Another "oops" is that the DMCA was created under Clinton, not Bush.

DaleDe
03-13-2009, 01:24 PM
If people use the tool to comvert to other format to be able to read the books then the reasonable response from libraries is to make the books available in more formats.


I believe that libraries are supplying eBooks in all the available formats that there is. Most formats do not support time limited licenses.

Dale

pilotbob
03-13-2009, 01:29 PM
:offtopic:


If I ever was to get a chance to talk to Obama, I would ask him about repealing the DMCA.

I might ask him that too... but certainly not the first topic I would want to discuss. First I would strongly encourage him to push to get passed and sign into law the Fair Tax Act. Then maybe stop wasting all this money on "The War on Drugs". After that perhaps.... some more things, then the DMCA... then may WTF is the reason we haven't stopped printing the $1 bill?

BOb

DaleDe
03-13-2009, 04:48 PM
Whatever happened to Fortran 77? Those were the days... punch cards and waiting hours or days for printouts.

It got replaced with Fortran 95, why they didn't wait to 99 I am not sure but perhaps they were impatient. After all, original Fortran was Fortran 55.

Dale

TallMomof2
03-13-2009, 07:14 PM
Guess I'm too young to remember Fortran 55. :D

wallcraft
03-13-2009, 08:49 PM
After all, original Fortran was Fortran 55. See the first IBM 704 Fortran Manual (http://www.fortran.com/ibm.html) from 1956.

slayda
03-13-2009, 09:35 PM
Guess I'm too young to remember Fortran 55. :D

You are young. I learned with FORTRAN II.

DaleDe
03-13-2009, 09:50 PM
You are young. I learned with FORTRAN II. I learned with Fortran II as well. It came out in 1958 but I was still too young. I learned in the early '60s. Fortran II was the first portable version of Fortran.

Dale

tjax
03-31-2009, 10:49 PM
Hi guys,

I'm new to the DRM ebooks and I've found you via Google.

I've just purchased an Adobe PDF ebook from echapterone.com. The PDF starts with "%PDF-1.5". It opens fine in Adobe Digital Editions 1.7.1079 (the latest version). After launching ineptkey.pyw (version 3) I get "key successfully retrieved" and the adeptkey.der file. I launch ineptpdf.pyw (version 2), I select my PDF and a name for the output file (test.pdf) and let it do its job. After a few moments I get my decrypted pdf. The problem is that it's broken. FoxIt Reader 1.3 complains that it "could not parse test.pdf". Adobe Reader 7 says that the file is damaged but is being repaired, then "the file is damaged and could not be repaired". When trying to open it with Digital Editions, I get only a blank page.

When opening the decrypted file with a text editor, it starts with "%PDF-1.5", it ends with "%%EOF", its structure seems fine - you can clearly see the tags. Something is wrong though, like the key might be wrong.

So, has Adobe already updated their system, or am I doing something wrong?

JohnB
04-01-2009, 11:49 AM
I'm thinking Adobe has circumvented the circumvention - others are having similar issues.

RobbieClarken
04-01-2009, 11:59 AM
I'm thinking Adobe has circumvented the circumvention - others are having similar issues.

Interestingly they have also just disabled activation of Acrobat 6 and 7 (http://adobe.com/go/digitaleditions_kb_act) which could also be used for DRM removal. Coincidence?

Sydney's Mom
04-01-2009, 11:10 PM
I'm thinking Adobe has circumvented the circumvention - others are having similar issues.

Although I would never admit it, we may be being paranoid. I have found newer PDFs that decrypt just fine, and older ones that don't. Must just be a bug that was out there for awhile.

i♥cabbages
04-02-2009, 02:31 PM
When opening the decrypted file with a text editor, it starts with "%PDF-1.5", it ends with "%%EOF", its structure seems fine - you can clearly see the tags. Something is wrong though, like the key might be wrong.

There's just a bug in the current version of the script which causes it not to correctly handle PDFs which use certain features introduced in version 1.5 of the PDF spec. I've got an updated version but have been v. v. busy with other things and haven't had a chance to distribute it yet.

pampalini
04-03-2009, 06:09 AM
There's just a bug in the current version of the script which causes it not to correctly handle PDFs which use certain features introduced in version 1.5 of the PDF spec. I've got an updated version but have been v. v. busy with other things and haven't had a chance to distribute it yet.

I always loved cabbages!!!
:thumbsup:

radamo
04-03-2009, 11:52 PM
Please Help!!! I have downloaded and installed Python 2.6.1 and the PyCrypto for 2.6 and I have the scripts but I have no idea how to use this now? I looked at I*Cabbages site and I can't figure how it knows what pdf I am looking to work on...
Thanks for any help.
RA

radamo
04-04-2009, 12:18 AM
I am getting errors running the ineptkey script. Has this worked for anyone running Vista 64 with 64 bit versions of Python and PyCrypto?
RA

joblack
04-04-2009, 03:40 PM
I am getting errors running the ineptkey script. Has this worked for anyone running Vista 64 with 64 bit versions of Python and PyCrypto?
RA

The 64 Bit version has problems. You can use the 32-bit version of Python + PyCrypto ...

radamo
04-04-2009, 04:20 PM
The 64 Bit version has problems. You can use the 32-bit version of Python + PyCrypto ...

Thanks for the reply. I will try to unistall the 64's and give the 32 bit a shot.
RA

imeagor
04-05-2009, 04:51 AM
millison thanks

I will test it and show the results

imeagor
04-05-2009, 04:54 AM
Hi guys,

I'm new to the DRM ebooks and I've found you via Google.

I've just purchased an Adobe PDF ebook from echapterone.com. The PDF starts with "%PDF-1.5". It opens fine in Adobe Digital Editions 1.7.1079 (the latest version). After launching ineptkey.pyw (version 3) I get "key successfully retrieved" and the adeptkey.der file. I launch ineptpdf.pyw (version 2), I select my PDF and a name for the output file (test.pdf) and let it do its job. After a few moments I get my decrypted pdf. The problem is that it's broken. FoxIt Reader 1.3 complains that it "could not parse test.pdf". Adobe Reader 7 says that the file is damaged but is being repaired, then "the file is damaged and could not be repaired". When trying to open it with Digital Editions, I get only a blank page.

When opening the decrypted file with a text editor, it starts with "%PDF-1.5", it ends with "%%EOF", its structure seems fine - you can clearly see the tags. Something is wrong though, like the key might be wrong.

So, has Adobe already updated their system, or am I doing something wrong?

I have found this problem, who can provide the solutions, thanks

tjax
04-05-2009, 07:03 AM
I have found this problem, who can provide the solutions, thanks

Like i♥cabbages said a few posts up, there's a bug in one of the scripts, he has the solution, but we're gonna have to wait a bit for him to distribute it. I guess he will notify us here after he uploads it somewhere.

BTW, thanks, i♥cabbages, for your work.

joblack
04-05-2009, 07:55 PM
Like i♥cabbages said a few posts up, there's a bug in one of the scripts, he has the solution, but we're gonna have to wait a bit for him to distribute it. I guess he will notify us here after he uploads it somewhere.

BTW, thanks, i♥cabbages, for your work.

If i♥cabbages hasn't got time I can check for the error as well. Send me the crypted pdf and your key ... on the other hand it would be a double work to do.

guguy
04-06-2009, 11:47 AM
There's just a bug in the current version of the script which causes it not to correctly handle PDFs which use certain features introduced in version 1.5 of the PDF spec. I've got an updated version but have been v. v. busy with other things and haven't had a chance to distribute it yet.

If you're currently so busy maybe you could just email it to a member
of the board and ask him to distribute it ?
I could do it for instance (email : tanguy dot moret @ gmail dot com)

ilovejedd
04-07-2009, 01:10 AM
Just downloaded the script and I must say, it's pretty nice. :)

The latest update to Stanza (1.8) didn't add support for Adobe PDF/ePub DRM'd files so now, I'm left with no way to read borrowed library books on my iPhone. I spent last night trying to OCR ebooks but stopped when it was around 3am since I had to wake up for work at 5am. Forgotten about this thread until now.

I'm happy to report it works quite well. Now I'm off to convert the PDFs to epub so I can read on my iPhone. :)

imeagor
04-08-2009, 09:25 PM
eagerly looking forward to the revised script released by i♥cabbages, who is hero in our heart.

Sydney's Mom
04-09-2009, 07:41 PM
eagerly looking forward to the revised script released by i♥cabbages, who is hero in our heart.

Absolutely the Best!!

daesdaemar
04-13-2009, 12:58 PM
I'd appreciate a PM if anyone knows the whereabouts of the script :)

imeagor
04-13-2009, 10:32 PM
When opening the decrypted file with a text editor, it starts with "%PDF-1.5", it ends with "%%EOF", its structure seems fine - you can clearly see the tags. Something is wrong though, like the key might be wrong.


However, my decrypted file starts with "%PDF-1.4" and ends with "%%EOF", it still cannot be opened properly.

pfisterfarm
04-16-2009, 11:06 AM
Are the changes to the new version of the script extensive? Could just the changes be posted so they can be applied to the older version?

joblack
04-17-2009, 09:48 PM
Are the changes to the new version of the script extensive? Could just the changes be posted so they can be applied to the older version?

Check out the new tags in PDF 1.5 - these are the possible changes in the parser.

pfisterfarm
04-18-2009, 01:26 PM
I may have misunderstood... I thought there was an update to the script. I guess I can try and look at the new tags at some point if I get a chance...

ReAdder
04-19-2009, 04:35 AM
Isn't 1.5 was introduced in 2003?
I mean isn't it fairly old, with 1.7AEL3 around?

Anyways my target files are all 1.5 (from NetLibrary)
And I'm dying to get a new version, as I also get 'Error -5 while decompressing data'

BTW, FYI I had to download DE 1.0, as 1.7 freshly from adobe (4/17/09) refused to accept ebx.etd files.

joblack
04-19-2009, 01:06 PM
I may have misunderstood... I thought there was an update to the script. I guess I can try and look at the new tags at some point if I get a chance...

Well, I'm searching myself but ILC has it but hasn't released it yet.

pampalini
04-19-2009, 06:05 PM
.... but ILC has it but hasn't released it yet.
how do you know that?:chinscratch:

btw...
did you find something?

joblack
04-19-2009, 06:56 PM
how do you know that?:chinscratch:

btw...
did you find something?

Because he wrote so :cool: - not yet, still reading the adobe pdf reference for changes ...

elpheaba
04-20-2009, 01:21 PM
I purchased a book, in pdf that is very large. I ran the script, it completes and it tells me that it is sucessfully decrypted. I add it to calibre and attempt to convert it, and calibre tells me it is DRM protected. Is this a problem anyone else has had? Help!

joblack
04-20-2009, 02:23 PM
I purchased a book, in pdf that is very large. I ran the script, it completes and it tells me that it is sucessfully decrypted. I add it to calibre and attempt to convert it, and calibre tells me it is DRM protected. Is this a problem anyone else has had? Help!

The script doesn't remove the additional custom properties named EBX_* - perhaps your program doesn`t like these ... remove them manually and check again.

elpheaba
04-20-2009, 07:33 PM
The script doesn't remove the additional custom properties named EBX_* - perhaps your program doesn`t like these ... remove them manually and check again.
Sorry I feel like an idiot, but how do I do this?:help:

desertgrandma
04-20-2009, 07:54 PM
Sorry I feel like an idiot, but how do I do this?:help:


I would also like to know. I am having the same problem

joblack
04-20-2009, 11:12 PM
I would also like to know. I am having the same problem

Under Adobe 9 it's under the Document Properties (Ctrl-D - depends on your Acrobat version). Under Adobe 6 its under Metadata and under Document Properties (in the File menu).

I don't know if that is the problem with your viewer. Delete them and if the problem still occurs it's another problem, perhaps another bug in the pdf parsing.

You can also check out the security settings under Document Properties. If there is still some thing 'not allowed' the script hasn't removed them all.

But as the script is completely parsing and recreating the pdf it can also some protected flag left (that means the pdf isn't protected it only signals the viewer it is).

If you don't find the solution you can send me the PDF (pm for E-Mail address) and I check about the protection mystery.

guguy
04-21-2009, 01:23 AM
I am really eager to download the updated scripts, and I guess many people on this board feel just the same. Maybe we could set up a donation program so as to motivate i♥cabbages to upload them... It would also allow him to spend more time coding. So, what do you think about this idea ?

pfisterfarm
04-21-2009, 09:23 AM
Doesn't he also need a new way to distribute it? Maybe that's part of the holdup...

guguy
04-22-2009, 09:08 AM
Doesn't he also need a new way to distribute it? Maybe that's part of the holdup...

Bittorrent would do the job nicely.

joblack
04-22-2009, 06:18 PM
I am really eager to download the updated scripts, and I guess many people on this board feel just the same. Maybe we could set up a donation program so as to motivate i♥cabbages to upload them... It would also allow him to spend more time coding. So, what do you think about this idea ?

Well, you would have had a huge donation to compensate for an average IT job. I don't think that ILC had done the adept job for profit, anyway.

Just relax and have a little bit patience. ILC seem to have a lot of stress at the moment. The e-Books won't run away ... :D

pfisterfarm
04-23-2009, 11:46 AM
Yes, I can understand stress, especially in these times, but I think another concern he's having is with not exposing his identity to Adobe (quite understandable, too). I'm not sure he'll release anything until he has a method he's comfortable with...

tjax
04-23-2009, 04:39 PM
The script is small, so he could just use Tor and upload it somewhere (any place which doesn't require registration). This would take care of all the privacy issues. If he needs to register somewhere, he could just use an anonymous proxy and something like mailinator.com for the email address.

pfisterfarm
04-23-2009, 04:49 PM
In his blog, he says "Bittorrent unfortunately provides no anonymity unless I e.g. seeded through TOR, which doesn't seem exactly brilliant." I've never actually used Tor, so I'm not sure what his objection is... I guess something will get worked out.

shankez
04-28-2009, 09:19 PM
Any news from i♥cabbages? Thank you!

joblack
04-29-2009, 01:03 AM
Any news from i♥cabbages? Thank you!

Nope - no sign at the moment.

keng2000
04-30-2009, 01:08 PM
hint:
He did post the script sources some place.
It is all over the torrent and also links for scripts in the eReader forum.
People can use the same way on epub with the pdf.
I do not test it myself yet.

ilovejedd
04-30-2009, 01:58 PM
hint:
He did post the script sources some place.
It is all over the torrent and also links for scripts in the eReader forum.
People can use the same way on epub with the pdf.
I do not test it myself yet.
The updated versions for handling miscreant PDF 1.5 files, though, are not yet in the wild. At least I haven't seen any signs of it. Most of the files you can find were released prior to April 2009 and those have problems decrypting some PDF 1.5 files.