checking for invisible pdf watermarks?

[UncleBose]

Hello
Just wondering if anyone knows about invisible .pdf watermarks meant for tracking purposes. How to check for them, how to remove them, etc.
Thanks for any advice!

[CobraPilot]

Some info links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking

http://invisible-watermark.suggestsoft.com/

http://www.softlist.net/products/invisible_watermark.html

For more, try Google.

[UncleBose]

I don't think the purpose of a forum is to brush off every question with a lesson on how to search, but for people with experience to come together and share ideas. I've already found all those links. I don't want to read about software which deals with image watermarking, or VISIBLE pdf watermarking and removal. I asked a very specific question--that is, how to deal with .PDF (not audio, not image) watermarks that are not meant to be found:

How can you find them, and remove them if they're there?

If anyone has any experience in this matter their advice would be appreciated.

[hech54]

Invisible watermarks? Never seen one.

[CobraPilot]

Uncle Bose, I'm sorry you have assumed my answer was a brushoff. Lots of posts on this forum are from folks who haven't done a Google search and want immediate hand-holding. No way to tell who's who in most cases.

When I saw your original post, I was curious, because I'd never thought of such a situation and went looking, found some resources, and thought I'd share them with you.

Maybe in an original inquiry you could mention the level of search you've already done, just to help the rest understand where you are in the process of finding an answer.

And then, when someone does answer in a way not meant in any way to be what you have chosen to perceive as a brushoff, maybe NOT treat them such that they truly regret trying to be helpful in the first place.

It's the "catch more flies with honey" approach. Just a thought . . .

[UncleBose]

Surely you don't have to try too hard to see how your intention could be misinterpreted. It isn't unreasonable at all to view a line like "For more, try Google" as condescension. I didn't "choose" to perceive it as such any more than I "choose" to dislike celery--it just happened. You know as well as I do the common message board habit of ridiculing a question by sarcastically suggesting Google as if the asker overlooked something as obvious as breathing.
On that note, I can accept that had my initial request included more information regarding my search process up to that point, we could've avoided this whole exercise.

[Supreme2k]

UB, you don't have to be an a-hole about someone helping you. He didn't just suggest Google, but supplied links as well. I'm sure he didn't just have those links on deck ready to use in an answer. He did some work for you.

As far as your original question goes, it seems VERY sketchy. More precisely, it sounds like you're trying to do something illegal.

[jman98]

UncleBose basically says "F*** you for helping me".

Nice.

Note to self: NEVER respond to an UncleBose thread.

[CobraPilot]

I guess my "catch more flies with honey" comment is being proved, UncleBose.

My initial reaction was the same as Supreme2K. However, I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt and try to be helpful. Wish you had given me the same benefit of the doubt . . . .

BTW, the celery analogy notwithstanding, perception of someone's motives, sarcasm, or attitude in written communication is always a choice made by the reader; the writer his no control over that unless they are obviously, blatantly trying to be insulting. For example, I think hech54's response is hilarious; you may think otherwise.

I'll join jman98 in making a similar "note to self."