Ancestry dot com is introducing new Terms & Conditions

[Rena]

Glasgow & West of Scotland FHS has put a notice on FB concerning the actions proposed by Blackstones Inc (the latest owners of ancestry dot com) from 1st Stpember 2021:-

" I cannot over-emphasis how important it is that Ancestry users read these altered terms and conditions relating to the contract they hold with the company. Genealogist Roberta Estes has commented "Clock is Ticking: In 28 Days, Ancestry CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT With Every Image In Your Tree". I have been looking at Ancestry's proposals and it appears that, from the beginning of September, they have the right to use all the photos and personal family information that you may have put on their site. This means that you could see your ancestral portraits appearing anywhere, without your consent or acknowledgement, for all time to come. Old family photos can be valuable and companies like Alamy, Getty Images and many others collect them and may charge for their use. It is unclear at present but you could end up paying to use your own photos! Leaving aside the legal position in the USA, this would appear to breach our own Data Protection legislation. More information on how to complain can be found at https://www.gov.uk/data-protection/make-a-complaint

[River Tyne Lass]

Thank you for posting this for people Rena.
I have received an email recently re terms and conditions change.  But lets face it, how many busy people might read boring terms and conditions.
What you have posted is more direct about what seems to be planned.  Perhaps Ancestry needs to be likewise more transparent about what their intentions are.  I fear too many people will not discover things until it is too late.
I must say, it sounds outrageous to me and like theft how they plan to take ownership of people's photos.
Thankfully, I don't have photos of people up.  If I did they would be coming straight down after reading your post Rena.  I must say I think what they are doing is out of order and will tarnish their reputation .. if they care about such things.
All they need to do is display in bold writing on their website that from September all photos and information posted will be theirs and then people can make their own minds up whether they wish to lose control over their own stuff.  It could be that simple and transparent. 
I will make a complaint.  I think the big guns at Ancestry will have their way, money generally wins out.  But at least I can register that I do not think they are being transparent enough and that I feel that this and such intentions are out of order.

[KGarrad]

Ancestry's Ts & Cs have always included such a clause!
They rely on people not reading Ts & Cs.

[Berlin-Bob]

see also:
https://www.legalgenealogist.com/2021/08/04/one-big-change-at-ancestry/

Ancestry has just updated its terms of service and privacy statement — again — and this time there is a change buried deep in its language that is of significance to users.

As of the change, effective yesterday (3 August 2021), a user can’t change his or her mind about any content uploaded to Ancestry: as of yesterday, you’ve just gifted the rights to that content to Ancestry, forever.

[arthurk]

An update to this - apparently Ancestry has now backtracked to some extent. From The Legal Genealogist again:

According to Ancestry now, users who upload content to Ancestry still give Ancestry a perpetual and non-revocable license to use the content.

But, it says now, “perpetual and non-revocable” doesn’t mean “perpetual and non-revocable.”

Confused? - see the full article at https://www.legalgenealogist.com/2021/08/06/ancestry-retreats/

[Rena]

This is ancestry dot com.

ancestry dot co dot uk must have to abide by the UK DATA PROTECTION ACT.

Basically ,when it was introduced about a couple of decades ago, anything, any data, etc ., (name address, etc)  ON A COMPUTER was not to be sold to a third party.

Up to that time local authorities would sell the information that they collected on annual electoral forms about who and what ages lived at particular addresses.  Once the information was put on computer they were not supposed to be able to sell the information.

[arthurk]

From a quick non-expert look, it appears that Ancestry apply the same T&Cs (with a few location-specific clauses) regardless of which site you're using.

These distinguish between Personal Information (eg your name, contact and payment details etc) and User Provided Content. Personal Information is the kind of thing that a Data Protection Act would be concerned with; I don't think User Provided Content is - unless someone potentially breached it by providing information about living people.

User Provided Content is defined as "content such as family trees, photos, videos, recordings, stories about relatives, your comments in trees, community discussions, or about records, and responses to email surveys and questionnaires available through our Services", and as far as I can tell, the changes to the T&Cs relate to this alone.

As I said, I'm not an expert, so others might like to look through the T&Cs to see if I'm on the right lines:

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/cs/legal/termsandconditions

[Guy Etchells]

This is ancestry dot com.

ancestry dot co dot uk must have to abide by the UK DATA PROTECTION ACT.

Basically ,when it was introduced about a couple of decades ago, anything, any data, etc ., (name address, etc)  ON A COMPUTER was not to be sold to a third party.

Up to that time local authorities would sell the information that they collected on annual electoral forms about who and what ages lived at particular addresses.  Once the information was put on computer they were not supposed to be able to sell the information.

Sorry but you are wrong, if you submit your information to a dataset or website that is available to the public the owner of the dataset has the legal authority to sell it.
That is exactly why the Electoral Register is available in two forms the full register which cannot be sold and the open register which may and is sold to whoever wishes to buy it.
Cheers
Guy

[Rena]

I've started pruning my tree, which has grown far more twigs than I intended.  The extra twigs are my grandparents kith and kin, who died due to conflict and I collected quite a bit of information, photos of ships they served in, etc. as I thought I should give them recognition for their bravery.  One example being my paternal grandmother's brother-in-law who is mentioned in the merchant ship's log as having died of heart failure in Valetta harbour aged 62 in 1916.

I must say that I've been rather pleased that my dad's direct ancestors weren't part of the rich tea merchant branches with all the connotations of who worked on tea plantations.
Having said that -  I've been rather peeved that 13 people on ancestry have taken the early 20th century family group image that I posted;  but didn't bother to leave any explanation.    Today I accidentally came across the name and image of one American person who had taken the family portrait image.  Horror of horrors he must think my branch was part of the rich tea merchant families.