Someone has put my tree on Ancestry

[Sylviaann]

No not a red book.  It was produced by a member of the family who lives in the area and could have checked all the parish registers.  It was done before freebmd was on the net.

Sylviaann

[LoneyBones]

To quote Silviaann, there have been a number of threads on this subject.
The answer is really always the same.
"Your" tree, also belongs to your siblings, your cousins, your parent's siblings, their cousins and their parent's siblings, ad infinitum.......
A tree is just that, a whole family of people who are related by birth or marriage.
Anyone who ever went to a records office or who now has access to a computer, has access to just about any person who was ever born.
I know we can never find the blighters when we want them, but if they were born, someone knew about it and 99.9% of the time it was recorded somewhere.
So a TREE is a tree.

Leonie.

[majm]

Yep, and we are all just twigs on the many branches.  We purchase or otherwise acquire records about other twigs on those branches, and here in rootschat we all try to help each other's information as best we can.  But we never own the tree, and its up to us to look after the tree as best as we can.   And thats Just Moi own opinion!

[coombs]

Hi

I have had a relative only by marriage, and the relatioship quite distant, who copied and pasted all of my tree over. At first, I thought "Wow" someone else is researching my ancestors but then after looking into it further, I found that I already had made brief contact with them on GenesReunited and they said that they had a relative who married a great, great, great, great aunty of mine.

She even copied and pasted my living relatives, including me, onto her tree.

Ben

[mshrmh]

I couldn't agree more.  You don't "own" your family tree.  It's there for all to discover.  If you don't want to share your research, then don't share it.  Ancestry don't let casual viewers access the details of living people, and that's where their responsibility ends.

Nick29 - that's not exactly the case. Recently I did a casual search without signing in and found a living relative on Ancestry's One World Tree, so I checked their rules "OneWorldTree never shares information about living family members born after 1930." My relative was born before 1931.
(I sent an e-mail to the tree "owners" and they were apologetic and happy to remove my relative's details).

[majm]

Hi Ben,

So now you are on someone else's tree!, but I hope you have contacted that person and asked them to make private anyone who is living!  If you have already done that and your name is still displayed, you should contact the organisation directly - its just not permitted, identity theft and personal privacy and the privacy of partners, ex-partners, etc, are just some of the issues that come to mind at this minute.   I am aware of one of my immediate family members who discovered that someone had entered the 2 year old child of an inlaw, and had not renewed the subscription so was not answering messages! That 2 year old is obviously not old enough to give consent to the details that were displayed.  It was fixed with an international phone call from Australia to someone in the UK.  

Cheers Moi.

[raa]

i always ask if i can ad someone to my tree but i just use the line to add them to my tree i dont copy the whole tree wheres the fun in that i have had people copying a lot of my info so now i tend to just put year of birth rather than exact date i have a tree on an old pc which is not connected to net which i put exact dates as i do buy a lot of certs people with thousands on there tree i dont look at someone let me view there tree 49 thousand that went straight into delete box besides how do you know what is correct info i have 800 on my tree most of that i have found myself with help from people on here and genes and britgen we help each other but sad some just help themselves david

[kerryb]

As has already been stated my tree is shared with other descendants of my forebears and so I have learnt to live with the fact that my tree is not exclusively my tree.

However what bothers me is when you share with someone your theories that are not yet proved and they put that up on an online tree for others to copy.  Still if they don't put my name to it, I can't be blamed! 

As I have found to my cost though every tree that I come across is not always correct and some mistakes can be populated amongst fellow researchers quite easily and readily.  They are all too willing to perpetuate the mistakes without researching themselves and then can get quite hot under the collar if you try to disprove their tree 

Kerry

[Erato]

This topic comes up so often maybe it deserves its own board on RC.  On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be much new to say about it.