Harley, c'mon. You can read plain English. Your last paragraph from Trent says the it is those who would "turn and twist," for "profane usages," that are "scurrilous, fabulous, vain, to flatteries, detractions, etc." Further down in the paragraph, it says plainly that "all people of this kind be restrained" from disseminating false versions of Scripture. "This kind" refers to those who prduce the works just described. It's plain English, as you have it posted here.
Do you suppose that the Established Church in England was any less diligent in making sure that the Douai-Rheims Bible was expunged from existence, as much as possible? Mere possession risked the death penalty. BOTH Protestants and Catholics, in the time period we're discussing, were pretty zealous in making sure the "wrong" Bible was kept out of circulation.
The Council of Trent had every reason to desire to control spurious translations. Many circulating at the time were barely more than platforms for polemic, so bad were the translations. But, in any event, the Catholic Church, having seen its early sons write the New Testament, understands itself to have been the discerner, compiler, vetter, canonizer AND sole legitimate interpreter of Scripture. It has every right, as the Bible's true custodian, to undertake the safeguarding of its contents. Especially in the sectarian maelstrom that was mid-1500's Europe.
You know and I know that the "twist and turns" mentioned by Trent is a subtle way of saying anyone who disagrees with the "official view" of the Church. Anyone who doesn't agree with the Church's view is putting scripture to "profane use".