Genealogy Chat

Maybe she has something to hide, or maybe just being a 'grump! Simlpe as that lol. Marion

It seems a strange thing to do, give you all that info and then demand its removal, I would think she would be pleased to see it on there as more people may connect. Having said that, I just had a mooch through the rootsweb tree sites and I was shocked to see my mum on there - she died in 1987 and yes, I had given access to my tree to someone on here but I was just a bit shaken to see her name.

HI THIS LADY CAN NO MORE CLAIM OWNERSHIP OF YOUR ANCESTORS THAN SHE CAN CLAIM OWNERSHIP OF THE GENES WHICH GO TO MAKE YOU......ASK HER IF SHE WOULD LIKE TO COME OVER AND PICK OUT THE BITS OF YOU SHE THINKS SHE OWNS .....TELL HER TO BRING HER OWN MICROSCOPE AND ANESTHETIC (FOR YOU THAT IS )......I WOULD BE OVERJOYED TO THINK I HAD COMMON ANCESTERS WITH SOME ONE ..AND CHUFFED TO THINK THEY WERE TELLING THE WORLD ABOUT IT...DONT LET THIS SELF CENTERED LADY UPSET YOU ANY MORE...WANT SOME OF MY ANCESTERS PUT THEM ON WHERE EVER YOU LIKE...NEXT THING SHE WILL BE SAYING NO ONE CAN PUT THE LORDS WORD ON THE NET....AFTER ALL HE IS OUR HEAVENLY FATHER... JUST FORGET HER AND CARRY ON ENJOYING DOING YOUR TREE LILIAN

At the end of the day, she cannot prove the information you have put there is hers! You could have re-done it all yourself. Anne

A recently found Aunt of mine who is also a journalist, I was happy to hear when I struggled to locate anything on my maternal family said a wise thing 'my information is your information and we all have a right to know who we are, nobody owns the information' If they are part of your family you are entitled, if it gets up her nose, tuff!!!

I happen to know, both through my own research and material supplied by others, that Queen Victoria was married to a man called Albert; her father was Prince Edward who himself was a son of King George III. Victoria had nine children, including Albert, Helena, Louise, and Leopold . . . . . . oops, I better delete this message in case I get a request from Prince Charles to remove 'his' family tree from the internet ! ;)

The law is different in America, I believe. Once upon a time, when I was new to this hobby, I sent a gedcom of my whole family to a newly-found relative, thinking only the relevant information would be extracted to his computer ... unfortunately, not so, he stored the whole thing, and, in time, forwarded his gedcom (with all my family - living and otherwise) to someone else. This someone else in America put my family on the net. I did not know this until a cousin searching for a name found herself, husband and young children on the net ... it led to a lot of upset, we had a lot of hassle with the person in America who turned quite nasty. I learned from this lesson only to send certain details by email attachment. Joy

The way I look at it, is we are all Historic researchers and history is for every one. What ever my ansestors did or said will hurt no one, so why should it upset me if some one eles uses the info I put together. I'm glad they are trusting enough to uses my research, and if they are some distent relle, 'Welcome to the Family.'

I have just sent off copies of about 14 certificates to a 2nd cousin who got intouch with me through this site. She has not done the family tree yet so this will save her a lot of money and time but I am pleased to do that. I have done my family tree for my family and they still have the details so what difference does it make. Another distant family member contacted me and we have exchanged all our information and sent each other copies of certificates ect and have both benefited. So many people have helped me get the information I have so without their help I would have much less to pass onto family members. At the end of the day she has her family tree and you have yours I cannot see what difference it makes. There are some strange people about. Good Luck to you and I hope the situation does not get to bitter. Regards Irene

What a pity all this unpleasantness has spoiled your enjoyment of family information. I personally would be glad to share all of my family information as I feel that this is the one way to keep your family "alive" so to speak'

The law states that any thing in the public domain, that is not copy righted or protected in some other way. Is NOT the property off any one. This applys to any thing relating to geneaolagy as it dose to any other infomation that can be obtaind thru research, So thou this peson might of done the origanl research she dose not own it. as you could obtain the same infomation by researching the same documents. As long as there are no liveing persons in the tree that you have not obtaind the OK from, then she can not do any thing about it. Also as you have acredited her with the research (that she sent freely to you with out any restrictions) then you are not incroching on her rights. (whos just been looking up the copy right and Pattent Laws)

Thanks everyone - at least we are all thinking along the same lines. I'm going to send a polite email apologising for upsetting her (I hate upsetting people!) but pointing out that this is my family too and all teh information on the website is in the public domain anyway and that she and her branches are not listed. Hopefully, that will solve it. As for Twinkle's point...that's an interesting one. She certainly provided me with the information, some of which she got from another part of the family and I guess if I was claiming to have done all teh leg work myself, she'd be right to be a little miffed that someone else was taking the credit. But I'm not. I freely admit that huge chunks of my tree have been researched by others - and I'm eternally grateful taht there are people out there with the time and resources to do it. Families eh! Can't live with them, can't live without them.

Point out that you have only your direct line online, in case she thinks you've copied the entire thing. Remind her that you are also descended from these people and consequently if she has any ownership claim to them, then so do you. Actually it sounds more like an objection to you publishing material she's spent time and money researching. Did you ask her, or tell her that this was what you intended to do?

Once the information has been provided to you, it becomes yours. The only thing this lady could reasonably expect you to remove is her name as the source, as the information you are displaying is now yours anyway. I'd would write her a polite letter or email asking if this will suffice as it is all you are prepared to consider. I would also ask her what she expected you to do with the information once she had supplied it to you. Kath. x

As long as none of the names involved are living and as long as the connections are genuine, I can't see the problem. The more family trees on the net the more likely it is that we can all benefit. nell

I don't keep my full family tree on internet sites now I use legacy which is free...that way you can put whatever records you have on that.....maybe she justs objects to the info being on a public site......

Elizabeth I've been thru all this with my 2nd cousin who actually used to be a member of this site but I've not seen her around for a while! We shared a lot of information initially but then she tried to claim 'ownership' of the tree, demanding that I remove the names from MY tree both on here and on Tribal Pages. She was (actually not so politely!) told that ANYONE could have obtained the census information and birth/marriage/death information contained in that tree as these documents are in a public forum. Therefore, there is no such thing as ownership of anything and I was certainly not going to remove what are just as much my relations as hers. I currently have 2 relations on this site who I am exchanging information with and I would like to think they wont suddenly demand that I remove it from my tree. Family Research is supposed to be all about the sharing and pooling of info As long as your tree doesn't contain any living members whose details may have been posted without their consent, I can't see what her problem is Lou

I agree with Tracy, If you havent put any of her living relations onto the tree I dont see how it affects her. Surely the whole point is to share information with others who are connected somewhere along the line, and its your family too. After all we all come from two people, Adam and Eve. lol. I would politely tell her that your research also points in the same direction as hers. Nicky

If they're your relations as well, I don't see what her problem is. As long as you haven't put anyone living on there, I don't think she has any rights over the information - no more than anyone else anyway. I'd tell her it's not "her" family tree, it's yours :)

Dear All I'm hoping someone can help me on this one. At some point last year I was in touch with a woman who had researched a chunk of my paternal grandmother's family. This researcher got in touch with me and very kindly sent me the information she had. I duly added the relevant relations into my tree (ie only the direct line that lead to my grandmother - goes back to the 1600s) and referenced where the information had come from. My family tree is on here and on rootsweb. Today, I received a very curt email (through the rootsweb site, not this one) telling me that I had no permission to put her family tree on the internet and I was to remove forthwith. What do I do? My maternal grandmother's relations are as much 'mine' as they are 'hers'; her name and her branch do not figure anywhere in 'my' tree. I obviously don't want to upset her, and am eternally grateful that she provided me with some valuable information but in the end who 'owns' this information? I've credited her with teh source but am reluctant to remove it from 'my' tree. Any ideas? I'm going to email her and apologise for upsetting her, but wanted some idea as to the question of ownership, ethics and good manners first!