<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title><![CDATA[PDF Logo Remover 1.0 comments:]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/</link>
<description><![CDATA[free licensed software daily]]></description>
<language>en</language>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 07:31:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
<atom:link href="https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<generator>FeedWriter</generator>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: whoopi]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155832</link>
<description><![CDATA[#7 You are a self righteous ____ . Now, there are obviously lawful uses of this software. If you can't figure one out, you lack imagination.

#21 Not necessarily. If the original is unavailable a relevant copy is admissible into evidence - look up "best evidence rule". The best evidence rule has been codified in Rules 1001 to 1008 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. 

. . . Now at this point I must correct myself. I should say, there would be legitimate uses of the software if it worked. Unfortunately, it did not recognize the watermark on the document I was trying to use. 
And $50 is ridiculous for this limited app.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 02:31:15 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155832</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[whoopi]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: ric]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155831</link>
<description><![CDATA[I just tested the same pdf file with various other software that I happen to have.

I confirm that EXpert PDF Editor Professional Edition Ver 4.1.670.404 is able to remove the watermark.

It does this beautifully and selectively i.e. you can choose to remove the watermark from specific pages and leave the watermark on other pages.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 01:19:23 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155831</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ric]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: ric]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155830</link>
<description><![CDATA[Tested it with a sample. 
http://www.stefanochizzolini.it/common/contents/projects/clown/samples/WatermarkSample.pdf

It FAILED to remove the watermark. All of you can repeat this test and see for yourselves. 
It was able to remove the two images at the top of the page. 

The software is named PDF Logo Remover. That is CORRECT.

It is not named PDF WATERMARK Remover. 

The advertising copywriter got carried away and included the ability to remove Watermarks in his description of the software. 

Or the company does not know the difference between an Image inserted within a document - and a WATERMARK.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:19:50 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155830</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[ric]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Thank you, Giovanni !]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155829</link>
<description><![CDATA[Many thanks to Giovanni @13 !!]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 22:31:10 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155829</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thank you, Giovanni !]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Paul Binns]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155828</link>
<description><![CDATA[@ #7 --  I am completely with you in your ethical concerns.  There would be one legitimate use for software like this if it was able to clean background "noise", dust marks etc from photocopied or old scanned documents processed into a PDF.  In that case, it could be very useful even to the original creator of the document or the document's archivalist.

This software would be so much better if it could do that even if only to some extent.  I don't really know of any other software that can even approach this task.  ANYONE ??]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 19:49:43 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155828</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Binns]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: cat]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155827</link>
<description><![CDATA[Installed and tried it on several multipage files. It failed every time. Sometimes it could not identify the image to remove, other times it wanted to remove the entire page. Sometimes it just crashed. Not a very useful program.]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 18:38:21 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155827</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[cat]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Donald Bock]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155826</link>
<description><![CDATA[I am shocked that many would want to VIOLATE the (c), TM and SM marks which when proven, attest to the special, unique or special aspect6s of a person, group or company making something to be protected and the symbols which show or prove it.

I strongly suggest GAOTD review its policy on giving away this kind of software.

Other than this, GAOTD has done good allowing special leverage with it's members to bring good, solid, various offerings with a pro touch.]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 17:52:43 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155826</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Bock]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: JLA]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155825</link>
<description><![CDATA[I fully agree with Lawrence (@11). I have tried it with an unprotected pdf with one logo and one watermark; it recognizes only the logo but not the watermark. 

Maybe for this reason the name is "Logo remover", not "Watermark remover" ... :-)

For me, thumbs down.

Thanks anyway by this giveaway.]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 16:46:29 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155825</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[JLA]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: linder]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155824</link>
<description><![CDATA[Personally I've never had the problem this software purports to solve. Few professional publications would create a document that is difficult to read on screen or print. Since printing PDFs is less and less necessary anyway, I figured this came into being to violate copyrights. The price and the country of origin sway me to think I am right. If you stand to make a lot of money selling someone else's work as your own, $50 is not so much a cost as an investment. Would anybody here pay $50 for this, if using it for strictly legit purposes?]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 16:07:04 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155824</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[linder]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Eriksson]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155823</link>
<description><![CDATA[To register, start by clicking "Options" !]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:08:33 -0500</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/pdf-logo-remover/#comment-155823</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eriksson]]></dc:creator>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>