Advice please. Am I safe in doing this?

[busyglen]

I have two queries that are similar, but not sure how I stand on them, so would be grateful of some advice.

I am re-creating as much info as I can find relating to a village that was pulled down in the mid-1970s, but so far most of the info has been transcribed by me. I was recently given a copy of a local directory for 1901 (over 100yrs old) which included details of the people living in the village. It wasn't taken from the Census as there were quite a few different people living in the houses, and there was no info on copyright. The firm no longer exists, so I copied it, changing the order from Name index to Road index. Could I fall foul here, bearing in mind the company no longer exists?

The second issue is that I have been given photocopies of three directories for 1953,1957 and 1964 relating only to the village. I believe it was printed by a local Estate Agents, which still exists on the Island, but with different partners etc. and a copy of these are held in the local Library. Could I use this information if I altered the layout, and what would the position be regarding the people who lived in the village at these times. Bearing in mind again that the village no longer exists.

I have been doing this in an effort to help anyone searching for their families that lived in the village, which so far has brought quite a few results.

I 'd welcome your advice.

Glenys

[Neil Wilson]

Hi Glenys
If you are transcribing it and formatting it yourself, bearing in mind the formatting is not the same as the original, I see no problem with the first.
The three copies of the directories - on my site I work on the 100 year rule, no names of any person who could be living, are put on the site.
You could always approach the Estate Agent to see if they did produce it and ask permission to use the parts without names.

[Peter Goodey]

People worry too much about copyright. You're not pirating the latest Hollywood blockbuster.

If I were you I'd just get on with it. If anyone complains you can always apologise.

[busyglen]

Hi Neil,

The site already bears names of living people. There are also quite a few photos and memories of these people, who have been happy to see their names associated with the village, including a list of the names of the remaining people when the village was pulled down. As these names can be looked up in the directories anyway, and it has been 35 years since the village was razed to the ground, I couldn't see that it would be a problem. Perhaps I'm wrong?

I could approach the Estate Agents, that wouldn't be a problem, but I am now wondering about the living people. There is only the head of household listed and initials or full name sometimes, together with the number of the house and the name of the road. I can't see how it could cause problems for the families now, as some I know have died, and others moved away and the rest were rehoused in the town, so not really traceable. I'm not sure now whether I should use them or not?

Glenys

[busyglen]

Thank you, Peter! I've only just seen your replies.

My feelings were the same as yours, but I am a worrier, hence the hesitation. :(

Glenys

[v.wells]

People worry too much about copyright. You're not pirating the latest Hollywood blockbuster.

If I were you I'd just get on with it. If anyone complains you can always apologise.

I agree with Peter - Well said Peter Goodey :)

[Thomasin]

It sounds like a good, valuable project, Glenys. Go for it! I think that as long as you acknowledge your sources everyone should be happy.

[busyglen]

Thank you all for your advice, it has been much appreciated and I've decided to `go' for it. :)

Glenys

[Peter_uk_can]

Good for you. and if it goes bad and you get locked up, we will smuggle you in a cake, disguised as a box of hacksaw blades. :wacko:

[busyglen]

Brilliant Peter! I'll hold you to that. ;)

Glenys

[AnnB]

Good for you. and if it goes bad and you get locked up, we will smuggle you in a cake, disguised as a box of hacksaw blades. :wacko:

And just think what fun any future members of your family might have, when they discover that Great Aunt Glenys was a jailbird........:innocent:

love
Ann

[busyglen]

Mmm. Now there's a thought! ;)

Glen

[Barmouth]

As a good friend of mine says ' It's better to ask for forgiveness than permission'

(Ref Lisa M numerous occasions, various places)

Regards
Linda

[busyglen]

As a good friend of mine says ' It's better to ask for forgiveness than permission'

(Ref Lisa M numerous occasions, various places)

Regards
Linda

That takes me back to my childhood!

If I asked my mother if I could do something, 5 times out of 10 she would say no. If I didn't ask, and I did something wrong, I would always say I was sorry, I didn't think! :)

Glenys

[Koops]

:idea:
I have two queries that are similar, but not sure how I stand on them, so would be grateful of some advice.

I am re-creating as much info as I can find relating to a village that was pulled down in the mid-1970s, but so far most of the info has been transcribed by me. I was recently given a copy of a local directory for 1901 (over 100yrs old) which included details of the people living in the village. It wasn't taken from the Census as there were quite a few different people living in the houses, and there was no info on copyright. The firm no longer exists, so I copied it, changing the order from Name index to Road index. Could I fall foul here, bearing in mind the company no longer exists?

The second issue is that I have been given photocopies of three directories for 1953,1957 and 1964 relating only to the village. I believe it was printed by a local Estate Agents, which still exists on the Island, but with different partners etc. and a copy of these are held in the local Library. Could I use this information if I altered the layout, and what would the position be regarding the people who lived in the village at these times. Bearing in mind again that the village no longer exists.

I have been doing this in an effort to help anyone searching for their families that lived in the village, which so far has brought quite a few results.

I 'd welcome your advice.

Glenys

Hi Glenys, this project sounds facinating are you able to tell us which village it all relates to? Can't wait to read all about it!
Koops

[busyglen]

Hi Koops,


I'm afraid I can't give you the link here as unfortunately it is hosted by a commercial site. But the village is Westminster on the Isle of Sheppey.

Glenys

[fudgecake]

googled site and had a look, very interesting, love the pics, keep up the good work xxx

[Guy Etchells]

There is nothing wrong with posting information about living people on an individual's website.
The Information Commissioner has previously made a statement about this.

However there may be a problem depending upon the relationship between your site and the commercial site.

If you simply mean you have been provided webspace by a company then there is nothing to worry about. If your website is simply another page of a commercial site then there could be problems.
Cheers
Guy

[busyglen]

googled site and had a look, very interesting, love the pics, keep up the good work xxx


Thank you fudgecake. :)

Glenys

[busyglen]

Thanks for your reply Guy. I appreciate your comments, which help.

Glenys

[raineshoe]

People worry too much about copyright. You're not pirating the latest Hollywood blockbuster.

If I were you I'd just get on with it. If anyone complains you can always apologise.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you, although I may be shot down in flames. I rely on images for my business heavily and we are constantly in our industry having pursue copyright theft. There is too much of the "it doesn't matter" attitude. It does matter, and I am glad the poster is concerned and responsible enough to check before going ahead.

Copyright is usually okay if you use the item for your own use and nothing else and no profit, but once you start to profit and distribute it, especially as your own work it becomes an issue.

Think on when somebody copies all your family trees and published family photographs without your permission and you are then on the board here complaining that somebody has done it. Its no different. But then if you see copyright theft as okay, you perhaps won't be worried!!

[malcolm99]

There is too much of the "it doesn't matter" attitude. It does matter, and I am glad the poster is concerned and responsible enough to check before going ahead.


I quite agree with raineshoe. There’s no problem with copyright. There are ‘fair dealing’ rules to allow you to publish reasonable amounts of a work without asking permission, but transcribing whole chunks of other peoples’ work is plain wrong if you can reasonably find out who owns the copyright (otherwise you put in a disclaimer such as you often see in books where the copyright of a photo can’t be traced).

I’ve found that if you want to use the copyright on something that is not currently an important revenue stream for the copyright owner, you only need to ask them for permission and most times they’re thrilled that you’ve seen their work and they don’t dream of charging a fee- as long as you yourself are not going to make a pile of money out of it.

I’ve two published works which are still in print and on sale and both have been put on the web - Google Books ‘nicked’ one - somehow they tumbled to the fact that I’ll never be rich enough to sue them!

So ask permission if it’s required, always acknowledge the author/source and, as raineshoe says, put yourself in the shoes of the person who created the ‘work’ you want to copy.

malcolm99

[raineshoe]

I’ve found that if you want to use the copyright on something that is not currently an important revenue stream for the copyright owner, you only need to ask them for permission and most times they’re thrilled that you’ve seen their work and they don’t dream of charging a fee- as long as you yourself are not going to make a pile of money out of it.

So ask permission if it’s required, always acknowledge the author/source and, as raineshoe says, put yourself in the shoes of the person who created the ‘work’ you want to copy.


malcolm99

Exactly Malcolm, its just a matter of being a decent person.

If anyone ever asks to use my pictures I usually allow it without question if its of my own daughter, although as we face paint its difficult to allow use of pics of other peoples children these days as you have to ask permission to take the picture and therefore anyone copying it does not have permission and I cannot in those circumstances allow use. Sad state of affairs!!

What I find most annoying is when people just assume they can take them. I have just had someone remove pictures of products that she had lifted from my online shop site to use on hers. If she'd asked, as a colleague in the theatrical makeup business I'd have probably said yes go ahead. But have sent her full weight of the copyright law and forced removal. I will now never allow her use of these images ever unless she pays for their use. If ony she'd asked.

As for my family tree all pictures that don't belong to me I've asked the person I got them from if I can use them on the web site and I have put a note courtesy of.... Everybody's happy then.

[busyglen]

I have only just caught up with these replies, as my request was some time ago.

As you are aware, I did ask opinions which were varied, but I erred on the side of caution and checked as far as I was able. It turns out that the people who produced the lists concerned are deceased, and the business that took over (who have no connection) aren't interested. So I am satisfied that I have done all that I could.

I also run a couple of websites, one of which has many photographs that have been given to me to copy and use. I have a page for acknowledgements and list everyone who had either donated photos or information, indeed, help of any description. I wouldn't want it any other way.

Glenys

[raineshoe]

I have only just caught up with these replies, as my request was some time ago.

As you are aware, I did ask opinions which were varied, but I erred on the side of caution and checked as far as I was able. It turns out that the people who produced the lists concerned are deceased, and the business that took over (who have no connection) aren't interested. So I am satisfied that I have done all that I could.

I also run a couple of websites, one of which has many photographs that have been given to me to copy and use. I have a page for acknowledgements and list everyone who had either donated photos or information, indeed, help of any description. I wouldn't want it any other way.

Glenys

Not getting at you Glenys glad you bothered to ask and find out and be a responsible person. You should be commended for taking the time and trouble.

It just really irritates me when people have such a blase attitude to copyright theft with the "just copy it and if anyone complains apologise". Its not good enough.

Its mainly from my business side that I have trouble with image theft etc and its so nice to see someone make the effort to check, although in your instance there is a limit to what you can do if they have all pegged it. All you can do then is credit the people with a mention. From experience there is nothing more infuriating than finding your images plastered everywhere. Unfortuantely, the business I am in is very visual and we do need to display pictures so people can see what they are getting, but anything that is particularly special to me I never put on the web.

Good luck with your project. I wish you all the success with it, you deserve it!!!!

[Guy Etchells]

The 1953, 1957 and 1964 directories are almost certainly still covered by copyright and should not be copied without consent.

Even if the author’s are dead now their heirs are the new copyright owners and are entitled to benefit from that.

In addition the works could even be covered by the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (though doubtful) which gives a 15 year “copyright on the collected facts” so even if you change the order in your transcription you could still be in breach and liable.

Remember ignorance of the law is no defence.
Cheers
Guy

[raineshoe]

Hey, might not have any heirs!!!! LOL

[busyglen]

Thanks for that info Guy.

I'm beginning to wish I hadn't started this!

I `believe' that the gentleman that printed these lists, and who was at the time an Estate Agent, died around the 1970s. He had previously sold the Agency to another firm, with no connections. I know he had a daughter who married and I believe she moved abroad, but I have no idea where, and I do not have the resources to find out. My desire to help other people is slowly begining to feel that it's not worth the effort.

A copy of these lists are also in our local library, (although I did not get my information from there) and are I suspect copied by people at various times. So......why am I bothering? :sad:

Glenys