tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post3308129878983598977..comments2024-03-21T19:08:05.737-07:00Comments on Genealogy's Star: Can a copy of a public domain document be copyrighted?James Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-80515480334232486332014-11-04T09:57:16.646-07:002014-11-04T09:57:16.646-07:00ancquest@ancquest.com
Collaboration is just that,...ancquest@ancquest.com<br /><br />Collaboration is just that, you work with another person, however, you as an administrator can decide who does what if anything at all. The database file is uploaded to our servers and the only ones who have access is yourself and any other person you invite. You can give them the ability to view only or allow them to make changes the choice is yours.<br /><br />Hopefully this helps you to understand it better, it is nothing like FamilySearch Family Tree, no one can change anything unless you let them.<br /><br />Claire<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-56836492500002212212014-11-03T10:24:27.092-07:002014-11-03T10:24:27.092-07:00Is there any company where genealogy is not pirate...Is there any company where genealogy is not pirated and is safe from being stolen? Is Ancestral Quest's use of Collaboration another word for theft?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-89587818548816013202014-10-29T11:09:37.945-07:002014-10-29T11:09:37.945-07:00I downloaded Heritage 7 and saw where they promise...I downloaded Heritage 7 and saw where they promised not<br />to steal peoples genealogy but they are putting the files on individual programs like new.familysearch.org files. The Mormons stole all 4 million of these files to form family Tree.<br />needless to say I deleted every file that even had the word Heritage on it. Four million devoted Mormon members including myself were burned by trusting our own Church.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-21793176781999764892014-10-13T16:59:37.674-07:002014-10-13T16:59:37.674-07:00http://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2014/10/can-doc...http://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2014/10/can-documents-be-owned.html<br />James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-28256904015280726412014-10-13T13:30:29.152-07:002014-10-13T13:30:29.152-07:00I have looked and looked but I can find no reply. ...I have looked and looked but I can find no reply. can you direct me to it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-60709491242706634102014-10-10T11:42:57.811-07:002014-10-10T11:42:57.811-07:00See my latest blog post for an answer. Good questi...See my latest blog post for an answer. Good question. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-45229348272784525182014-10-10T08:36:14.344-07:002014-10-10T08:36:14.344-07:00When a person purchases public records such as bir...When a person purchases public records such as birth, marriage, and death records from various states who owns these documents?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-3151618056724728122014-10-10T05:56:07.839-07:002014-10-10T05:56:07.839-07:00Federal government documents are not specifically ...Federal government documents are not specifically not covered by the copyright law. Most public records in the United States are "public" and not subject to copyright restrictions. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-60311612876628387882014-10-09T21:35:38.328-07:002014-10-09T21:35:38.328-07:00I understand that a U.S. government documents cann...I understand that a U.S. government documents cannot be copyrighted<br />because they are just facts but what about birth certificates, marriage<br />records and death records and which people purchased years ago from various States when it was common because there were not websites loaded with every kind of government record at the time. What is the states of these documents purchased from various State agencies?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-34060406951396760082013-12-09T07:01:31.022-07:002013-12-09T07:01:31.022-07:00Thanks for the comment.Thanks for the comment.James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-71021730418366537752013-12-09T07:00:55.293-07:002013-12-09T07:00:55.293-07:00I guess I should have made a strong point about th...I guess I should have made a strong point about the fact that local national copyright laws apply to any works and currently, the US honors the length of copyright protection where the work originated. This is an important point when dealing with any recent publications (+ or - 150 years). I don't think there is that concern with documents first created and published in the 17th Century, however. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-8822016684590164322013-12-09T04:29:53.621-07:002013-12-09T04:29:53.621-07:00The UK census is subject to Crown copyright. Accor...The UK census is subject to Crown copyright. According to the flowchart at http://www.nas.gov.uk/documents/Copyright Leaflet Appendix 2.pdf, UK census material published after 1989-08-01 is in copyright for 125 years after publication, while that published before that date is in copyright for 50 years from publication.<br /> <br />The raw facts themselves cannot be copyrighted but images of them apparently can be. Findmypast, for instance, includes a statement “Crown Copyright Images reproduced by courtesy of The National Archives, London, England” at the bottom of each image page. Images from the 1911 census include the same text in the images themselves but older ones indicate “Copyright photograph. Not to be reproduced photographically without permission of the Public Records Office, London”.<br /> <br />In the UK, an indexed database -- such as the census transcriptions -- can be copyright, but then anyone would be a fool to treat the provider's transcription as anything more than a route to the image (i.e. not to be copied verbatim). As far as I'm aware, anyone is free to make their own transcription of a census image and share it with anyone else.<br />Tony Proctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18330460400737261264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-73802122139091707622013-12-09T00:40:00.908-07:002013-12-09T00:40:00.908-07:00Excellent post, and answers to the concerns in the...Excellent post, and answers to the concerns in the comments. Well researched, and explained. I'll be passing out links to this post. Thanks! Jo Hennhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17566276500934815959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-75788526198354556472013-12-08T20:51:59.541-07:002013-12-08T20:51:59.541-07:00Contractual rights of reproduction is something th...Contractual rights of reproduction is something that lies with the originator (author) of the work, not the person making the copy. The old manuscripts, no matter how they are copied, would not fall into the category because the authors are long gone. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-16907898023585651662013-12-08T20:49:54.054-07:002013-12-08T20:49:54.054-07:00The level enhancement that makes a new work is sub...The level enhancement that makes a new work is subject to the decisions of the courts. On the books from Google, always check to see if someone else has the original edition. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-840808463536242462013-12-08T11:05:18.444-07:002013-12-08T11:05:18.444-07:00James, thanks for sharing your insights on copyrig...James, thanks for sharing your insights on copyright law. It sounds like you can't claim a copyright when you publish something in the public domain, such as US federal census records. But I think companies do claim a copyright on their digitized versions of those records. I wonder if the online publishers might argue that by enhancing the images to make them more readable they're essentially creating something new which is copyrightable. Also, I think Google Books lets you view only snippets of reprints of books now in the public domain. It looks like Google is acknowledging the reprint publishers' claim to a copyright on books that should be in the public domain. Despite its reputation for supposedly trampling over copyrights, it seems like Google is conceding to copyright claims that don't have lot of merit.Rick Crumehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07925928792303896148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-14445788157101833412013-12-08T09:44:09.654-07:002013-12-08T09:44:09.654-07:00Except - I am minded of the "difference"...Except - I am minded of the "difference" between genealogy and family history. In this case the "difference" is that between copyright and contractual conditions (e.g. over rights of reproduction) imposed as part of an agreement of access to materials. <br /><br />My concern is that many genealogists / family historians talk about "copyright", when they mean rights of reproduction. When you look at the circumstances they are discussing (e.g. publishing a copy of old documents from archives on their own web-site), it seems clear to me (as a non-lawyer!) that rights of reproduction are the crucial element. When faced with a statement that copyright can't exist in a document "X" years old, they may take that as authority to put on a web-site, in contravention of the rights of reproduction. <br /><br />Unless and until contractual rights of reproduction are talked about and understood by our community as much as copyright, and distinguished from copyright, then my concern is that people will apply correct answers to copyright questions, incorrectly to rights of reproduction, as in "The original's out of copyright, therefore I can put this company's image of it on my web-site."<br /><br />And maybe you have a better term for "contractual rights of reproduction" than I have, because I'm sure the lack of a simple word doesn't help people understand.<br />Adrian Brucenoreply@blogger.com