Ancestry Trees-Public/Private?

[Nick29]

This debate has taken place at least once a month since I've been frequenting Roots Chat.

It's not at all straightforward...... re photos, most do not have copyright because they were taken so long ago, and often by persons unknown.   When someone gives you a photo, or it is handed down to you, there is no inferred copyright.   When it comes to certificates, the copyright for these is held by the Crown, and they don't have any objection to not-for-profit reproduction.

Trees are not copyright, although any notes or stories that you add will be, if they are your own work.  You can't copyright data which is in the public domain.

The bottom line is that if you don't want stuff copied, then don't put it on the internet.

[wrjones]

I lean heavily towards Nick's position.

I was sent a photo about three years ago now of my Greatx2-Grandfather.Within a month of it appearing on my Tree on Ancestry it was on about forty other Trees.

I'm not complaining,I'm delighted.

Whilst we may think we may have worked hard to gain info about our rellies,we don't own the info!Its available to all by whatever means they come by it!

Regards
William Russell Jones.

[g eli]

I have several trees on Ancestry,most of these are private and are small pieces of information I have gathered about a family I think belongs on my tree usually pre census,but I haven't verified the connection.I also have a private tree which has family photos on .My main tree is public and although I make every effort to make sure it is accurate,I know mistakes creep in and I know huge pieces of it are copied complete with my spelling mistakes,I have given up worrying about people who copy wholesale, I have enjoyed finding the information and if someone wants to graft my English labourers onto their strange trees that's their problem not mine.
Liz

[ghostgirl]

I had a public tree on Ancestry _ I didn't mind at all if someone looked at it, and used it as a guide for their own research.  What I didn't like was when someone just copied the information directly without finding their own sources to back it up.  Now it's a private one.

This is close to my heart - due to a person copying and mistranscribing  information from a relative several years ago, my grandfather is listed on the IGI as having died in the 1930's (and I've seen several trees with this on it). However, he is a very healthy 100 years old! He got MARRIED in the 30's, then had 10 kids!

[Churchie]

Like so many of you, I changed my tree to private.
I delight in sharing information, and am a firm believer that if you give help you will receive it back.
I changed my mind about a public tree though, for the same reasons as many of you - other members taking my information, linking it to the wrong people, and then sharing it with umpteen other members.
The photos that have been passed down through my family are treasures, not to be hoarded and kept secret, but also, not to be used with no thought or care, which to me shows a complete lack of respect.

As an example: my great grandfather was 'lifted' from my tree and added to a completely different family, along with his photos, where the borrower MARRIED HIM TO AN UNKNOWN 6 YEAR OLD. He was a deeply religious man, who would have found the very idea appalling. Despite the mass of documentation for him in my tree, which should have made them aware of their error, the person who did it ignored my requests to remove him. Then, he started popping up in the trees of other people I'd never heard of, along with our precious photos.
Infuriating, insulting to his memory, and unstoppable.

A note - even if you do change your tree to private, check it from time to time, as mine mysteriously made itself public again, though I had not touched the settings!

Caroline.

[Nick29]

Well, the situation can have its funny side too 

My friend was entering the details of one of his ancestors whose surname was Behr.   On a whim, he put the parents down as 'Mummy Behr' and 'Daddy Behr'.

He was shocked and amused when a few months later he found Mummy & Daddy Behr adopted into half-a-dozen family trees 

(I've told this story a few times before - I repeated it for newcomers to the forum).

[Dean1]

I can identify with your "Behr" episode Nick (it also made me laugh).

Having great difficulty with a portion of my main Tree, I started a new Tree just to work out the portion that was causing difficulty and tried different people in different positions in the family and some people I had no proof for whatsoever.     I thought I had made it private so as not to cause others confusion but had actually not done so - believe it or not it has been copied ++

Sue

[wrjones]

There are some great Trees you come across on Ancestry.I was looking at one the other day that gave four different possible entries for an individual for each of the Census years!

I suppose its like making an each way bet.lol

Regards
William Russell Jones.

[mofid42]

I've come across some real corkers.

One I spotted a few weeks ago had a couple whose daughter was born nearly two hundred years after they had died and the daughter in her turn marrying almost one hundred years before she was born!

Another I found through a shaking leaf hint had my 3 x Gt grandparents. Everything seemed to check out, BMD and census entries all tallied for them being born, raised, married and dying in Surrey. But it all went awry when I noticed they were attached to only one child whose surname was totally different from theirs. This child according to the tree was born, raised, married and had children all in Manchester, and who then mysteriously went on to die in Manchester Jamaica.

Couldn't understand why the tree owner had apparently randomly added my 3 x Gt grandparents to their tree until I did a search and discovered they did have a family with the same surname as my ancestors on their tree but again they were all from Manchester. I can only assume they arrived at this ridiculous error via one of A* notoriously unreliable hints.....but surely the Surrey/ Manchester discrepancy should have given them a clue that things weren't quite right!!