A word of warning!!

[Erato]

I agree with Issy. I have no objection to people using information from my tree where it is relivant and there is a connection, but I do object when they copy people who are no relation to them at all  eg my father's sister-in-law's brother's wife etc. I can't see what satisfaction it gives them apart from being able to boast about how many people they have on their tree. I'm happy with my smaller tree where I know I have researched and confirmed everyone and and certain they are a part of my family. This is why I started this hobby, to find out where I came from, not to see how many names I could collect.

Jan

For the life of me, I can't understand why people are so bothered by this.  Why should it bother you at all what gives genealogical satisfaction to someone else?  If someone enjoys collecting names, so what?

I am presently communicating with someone about the daughter of my ggg uncle's wife's brother.  She is unrelated to me [biologically speaking] but she is buried in the grave site of my family and so she is someone of interest to me even though she is not a blood relative.  I would like to know how it is that she came to live withh my ggg uncle's wife as an unofficially adopted daughter.

[Treetotal]

It's a hobby and it's supposed to be fun...if you don't want your info copying then don't put it out there...you only have to google a name and you can grab loads of info off the net so it cuts both ways...I have taken photos from a well known site of people who are in my tree...if it's in the public domain then people will take it if it's relevant to them..look how many photos are put up on the restoration board...who knows where they might end up
The pay off for me has been the info and knowledge I've gained and the friends I've made from sharing.
Just my take on the matter...for what it's worth
Carol

[Isobelruss]

I agree with you Carol,but when you havent put it up there,and I hadnt,thats what annoys some people,I know its a fun hobby its also very expensive when done properly.

Isy

[delphi8]

A couple of years ago someone very distantly related to me through a marriage in the early 1800's took data without asking from my own family history website of every person linked through that one marriage which amounted to half of my complete family tree, 25 years of research.

I wouldn't have minded so much if she'd been related more closely or had just copied the data for the line she was interested in but she saw fit to copy the line down to the present day and then back up all the other branches on the other side of my tree as well.

What really annoyed me is that she copied two photos from my website, people not related to her and put the whole tree and the photos on public access on ancestry. The original photos may be out of copyright but the scanned images I produced of the said photos are copyrighted to me and ancestry made her remove them when I pointed this out and complained to them.

[Redroger]

There is a program called GEDMARK which enables publishers to ensure that their work is permanently and indelibly marked as to its original origins.

[Redroger]

Nick, I have no problem whatsoever with genuine researchers using information that I release, so long as it is relevant to their tree and mine. I object most strongly to plagiarisms in family history as in any walk of life. It is inherently deceitful for anyone to pass off another's work as their own.Another thing I object to most strongly (slightly off topic) is people who do not acknowledge information when they have asked for it, and when it is freely given in response to such a request. In my experience people requesting information in magazines are the worst offenders.

[Treetotal]

I agree with you on that one...I sent some photos of gravestones taken in St. John's Nfld that I learned were not my family....I posted them to a fellow researcher who requested copies and never had a reply..I know they recieved them as it was discussed online.
Bad Manners are unsual in this game thankfully
Carol

[Rossdal3]

I too had a public tree on Ancestry which worked well and attracted the many cousins that I now treasure as email contacts all over the world.

One day I found that matches were being thrown up for a private tree, for about 20 of my relatives across lines.  I was quite excited, expecting to knock down some brick walls, so I contacted the owner and got no answer on any query.  On further investigation I found all my photos and the stories I'd written on various relatives were copied as well.  The thing is, as much as you know that people can copy the contents of a public tree, you can't be prepared for the kick in the gut you feel when that happens and despite contacting thems everal times, there is no reply or acknowledment.  My tree is now private and like others corrections made which won't be shared.  This person also has 12,000 names in his tree.

Last week however I found my photos on another tree, this time with 14,000 or so in it. I emailed, expecting no reply and actually got one.  This person explained that my relatives were not in his direct line, but came up in an indirect way.  He said he likes to collect everything he finds a match for to help out any others that might be searching. He asked me if I would mind checking that what he had was accurate, which I did and he made the corrections I suggested.  Not my preferred way of doing my tree, but I was immediately more at ease because he had the courtesy to reply and explain. 

At the end of the day, any way that makes sure our relatives are remembered and their details accessible for those searching for their ancestors is a good thing, no matter what!

Jill

[andycand]

I found all my photos and the stories I'd written on various relatives were copied as well.

I believe that stories written by you are your copyright and if you can't contact the person who has put them online, contact the website. This may also apply to photos you have uploaded.

Andy