Database Copyright

[Rod Neep]

Databases may be protected under Database right (Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997) which gives protection for 15 years.
Section 16 gives strong protection to databases.
“Acts infringing database right
16. - (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, a person infringes database right in a database if, without the consent of the owner of the right, he extracts or re-utilises all or a substantial part of the contents of the database.

(2) For the purposes of this Part, the repeated and systematic extraction or re-utilisation of insubstantial parts of the contents of a database may amount to the extraction or re-utilisation of a substantial part of those contents.”

This in effect would cover look-ups of a protected database.
Cheers
Guy
I find this particular aspect to be extremely interesting Guy (And it should be to other readers too).

Let's look at a scenario (and I use your name for illustrative purposes only):

1. Guy Etchells makes a transcript of a parish register
(That becomes the copyright of Guy Etchells)

2. He gives a copy of that transcript to his county family history society, for use my members of the society.

now, the family history society does that, and also provides a look-up service for its members. SO far so good.

3. Then the FHS decides to make it available on CD and publish it, and sell it.
(Did they ask Guy Etchells if they could use his copyrighted material in this way?). The FHS called it their copyright.

4. Then the FHS comes to an agreement with the FFHS to reproduce that same work, and sell it on a CD of their own. (They called it their own copyright). In exchange for a royalty payment to the county FHS (which they may, or may not have received anyway).

The end result is someone's (copyright) work in transcribing a parish register being claimed (and sold) by two other parties.... without their express permission. It was their work that was being used in a product which then falls within the Database Regulations. Who is profiting?

Food for thought.

Rod

[Guy Etchells]

1 In addition to holding the copyright of the transcript the transcriber would also hold the database right of the work.

2 As with copyright much would depend upon whether the database right was assigned to the society with the transcript in full or limited.
If the database right was assigned with no conditions the FHS would then be able to do as they wished with the transcript, otherwise they would be limited by the licence conditions.

3 If the society did not have permission to use the database in this manner they would now be in breach of the database regulations 1997

4 As with 2 & 3 above this would be a breach of the database regulations unless the complier of the database had given consent.
The FHS could not give permission for a third party to copy a database if they did not have permission to do so.

Always assuming in the above that the original transcript was being utilised, database right recognises the “sweat of brow principle”.

Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997
Interpretation
12. - (1) In this Part -
….."investment" includes any investment, whether of financial, human or technical resources; ….


The maker of a database
14. - (1) Subject to paragraphs (2) to (4), the person who takes the initiative in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contenmessage=1 In addition to holding the copyright of the transcript the transcriber would also hold the database right of the work.

2 As with copyright much would depend upon whether the database right was assigned to the society with the transcript in full or limited.
If the database right was assigned with no conditions the FHS would then be able to do as they wished with the transcript, otherwise they would be limited by the licence conditions.

3 If the society did not have permission to use the database in this manner they would now be in breach of the database regulations 1997

4 As with 2 & 3 above this would be a breach of the database regulations unless the complier of the database had given consent.
The FHS could not give permission for a third party to copy a database if they did not have permission to do so.

Always assuming in the above that the original transcript was being utilised, database right recognises the “sweat of brow principle”.

Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997
Interpretation
12. - (1) In this Part -
….."investment" includes any investment, whether of financial, human or technical resources; ….


The maker of a database
14. - (1) Subject to paragraphs (2) to (4), the person who takes the initiative in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents of a database and assumes the risk of investing in that obtaining, verification or presentation shall be regarded as the maker of, and as having made, the database.

(2) Where a database is made by an employee in the course of his employment, his employer shall be regarded as the maker of the database, subject to any agreement to the contrary.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4), where a database is made by Her Majesty or by an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his duties, Her Majesty shall be regarded as the maker of the database.

Cheers
Guy

[Ladkyis]

Several Societies now ask the members who are transcribing to sign a waiver before they start so that copyright of the transcript belongs to the society.
and not to the transcriber.

Ann

[Lottie]

I find this particular aspect to be extremely interesting

Let's look at a scenario (and I use your name for illustrative purposes only):

1. Guy Etchells makes a transcript of a parish register
(That becomes the copyright of Guy Etchells)

2. He gives a copy of that transcript to his county family history society, for use my members of the society.

now, the family history society does that, and also provides a look-up service for its members. SO far so good.

3. Then the FHS decides to make it available on CD and publish it, and sell it.
(Did they ask Guy Etchells if they could use his copyrighted material in this way?). The FHS called it their copyright.

4. Then the FHS comes to an agreement with the FFHS to reproduce that same work, and sell it on a CD of their own. (They called it their own copyright). In exchange for a royalty payment to the county FHS (which they may, or may not have received anyway).

The end result is someone's (copyright) work in transcribing a parish register being claimed (and sold) by two other parties.... without their express permission. It was their work that was being used in a product which then falls within the Database Regulations. Who is profiting?

Food for thought. --
RodNot just food for thought - its occuring and the poor 'volunteer' is left out in the cold. The Data Act may protect them, but few Genelogical Transcribers would be able to afford to sue for breach of copyright. The case I know of, they are waiting for the FHS to sue, they have already threatened to do so.
!! </P>Anne's point re asking to sign a waiver has merit - in that at least the transcriber knows where they are !!
Personally I think the FFHS should publish a guidline on the publication of Databases, that are gifted to their member societies , to ensure that work done by members or non members is protected and at least acknowledged.

Also needing pA 0px">The end result is someone's (copyright) work in transcribing a parish register being claimed (and sold) by two other parties.... without their express permission. It was their work that was being used in a product which then falls within the Database Regulations. Who is profiting?

Food for thought. --
Rod[/QUOTE]Not just food for thought - its occuring and the poor 'volunteer' is left out in the cold. The Data Act may protect them, but few Genelogical Transcribers would be able to afford to sue for breach of copyright. The case I know of, they are waiting for the FHS to sue, they have already threatened to do so.
!! </P>Anne's point re asking to sign a waiver has merit - in that at least the transcriber knows where they are !!
Personally I think the FFHS should publish a guidline on the publication of Databases, that are gifted to their member societies , to ensure that work done by members or non members is protected and at least acknowledged.

Also needing protection are the Parish Regsiter Societies, many of whom have had their work published on CD, without their permission. They havn't the financial clout to take on big companies, particularly American ones.

Even though I have transcribed happily for Free BMD, Free Cens and Free Reg, I have doubts that a company may at some time publish the work, for financial gain. I don't consider the work I have done as having a copyright, but perhaps we should, so all the transcribers , can have a say as to what happens to the databases ( other than being availbale free on the Web)

Many transcribers were extremely upset when Free BMD database first appeared on Ancestry, until it was confirmed that they could only publish it on their website for 'FREE" access.

I think of the 2½% analysis that was done by a University ( Edinburgh I think) of the 1851 Census. That is now being published by Ancestry and S & N , did they obtain permission of the creators ????
rotection are the Parish Regsiter Societies, many of whom have had their work published on CD, without their permission. They havn't the financial clout to take on big companies, particularly American ones.

Even though I have transcribed happily for Free BMD, Free Cens and Free Reg, I have doubts that a company may at some time publish the work, for financial gain. I don't consider the work I have done as having a copyright, but perhaps we should, so all the transcribers , can have a say as to what happens to the databases ( other than being availbale free on the Web)

Many transcribers were extremely upset when Free BMD database first appeared on Ancestry, until it was confirmed that they could only publish it on their website for 'FREE" access.

I think of the 2½% analysis that was done by a University ( Edinburgh I think) of the 1851 Census. That is now being published by Ancestry and S & N , did they obtain permission of the creators ????

My tuppence worth, may turn to thru'pence when I think some more.

Lottie

aka Helen

On an Indian Summer 's Day in Lower Hutt New Zealand

[Burrow Digger]

Several Societies now ask the members who are transcribing to sign a waiver before they start so that copyright of the transcript belongs to the society.
and not to the transcriber.

Ann

Is that legal? Can the transcriber say no?

If I were transcribing (and I do plan to eventually) I would not wish to sign away all my hard work and not be compensated for it in some way.

If the Transcriber refuses to sign the waiver, what happenes next? Does that simply mean thet the FHS does not accept the transcription. If so it is their loss, until they can persuade someone else to sign away their rights.

If I was to transcribe a census record, can I put it up on my web site amd and put that it is copyrighted to me? Its not the data thats being copyrighted, but the way the data is being presented, right?

Burrow Digger

[Guy Etchells]

Burrow Digger wrote :

Is that legal? Can the transcriber say no?

Yes it is perfectly legal, it provides freedom of choice, the transcriber does not have to accept.
As far as I am aware societies that do ask for a waiver to be signed will often supply the material to be transcribed. It is also perfectly acceptable for a transcriber to set conditions to the waiver.

BD If I were transcribing (and I do plan to eventually) I would not wish to sign away all my hard work and not be compensated for it in some way.

Most transcribers feel that helping other genealogists is reward enough and don’t look for financial compensation.
One could however add a royalty clause in case of the transcription being used for monetary gain.

BD If the Transcriber refuses to sign the waiver, what happenes next? Does that simply mean thet the FHS does not accept the transcription. If so it is their loss, until they can persuade someone else to sign away their rights.

Correct, however it is really other family historians who lose rather than societies.

BD If I was to transcribe a census record, can I put it up on my web site amd and put that it is copyrighted to me? Its not the data thats being copyrighted, but the way the data is being presented, right?

Yes and no, I believe Canadian law is closer to US law than UK law in this respect, the USA does not accept the “sweat of the brow” theory but the UK does, which makes international copyright lucrative for lawyers.

However under the 1997 Database Right a database is protected both in full and in part. This means that under database right data is protected.

There is a question mark over this as the 1997 Database Right initially only extended in EU countries. Subsequently the Database Right is being portrayed as copyright and if it is copyright then it affords protection in all countries who were signatories to the Berne Convention; this would include the USA.

Eventually a case or cases will be decided in court and precedents set until then it will be a grey area of law.
Cheers
Guy

[Ladkyis]

burrow digger said
I would not wish to sign away all my hard work and not be compensated for it in some way.

Would you tell the FH Society up front before you started that you would require some form of compensation? Or would you do like most of them seem to and spend the time doing it and then say "If I don't get something I am taking this away"

This has happened in lots of Societies and it causes so much bad feeling and the *grudge* can be carried on for long after the person is a member - people take sides in things like this and even afterwards they won't let it lie and at every opportunity they drag out the *corpse* and pick over the bones hoping to find another argument.
I have transcribed lots of things for FH societies and handed them over without a qualm. I don't care if they acknowledge that it was me or not it is my way of returning the help I have received from others. I know what I have done and even if I worked for 8 hours a day for the rest of my life I could not go half way to repaying the kindness and unselfishness that I have been shown by others.

Ann

[Burrow Digger]

Uh Oh, I didnt mean to open up another can of worms. I had no idea how strongly people would feel, and I do apologise.

I was mostly referring to transcribing census records anyway, not parish records. I will most likely give my census work to Genuki. Since most of the parish BMDs in Devon, are transcribed already by the FHS, I dont think I need to do that. There is still a lot of census records that need transcribing.

BD

[Terry]

Hi, have you considered transcribing census for FreeCEN? the Devon 1861 and 1841 are both joint projects with the Devon FHS. FreeCEN puts a copy into the online database and a copy also goes to the DFHS for the Society's use.
See;-
myweb.tiscali.co.uk/terryleaman/1861-web-site/main.htm
OR
myweb.tiscali.co.uk/terryleaman2/1841index.html

[WaltonAus]

Hello everyone, a question that has been foremost in my mind when posting replies for peoples queries is the ownership of the info being posted.
As an example if some-one posts a query seeking info about Bill SMITH B:c1890 in London and I find and post a reply using either the BVRI (for example) or the Latter Day Saints website am I contravening any copyright laws. I always state where I found the record and give the file or reference No.
I was subscribed with another genealogy site and many of my "reply" postings were blocked on the premise of copyright. It was stated that I could continue to do research for others provided I "wrote" the info in my own words instead of "cut & paste".
I would like to get your views on this matter so that I don't fall into the same predicament again.
I enjoy researching & whilst my own search is at a brickwall I like to try to help others when I can.

Kind Regards
Peter Euston

[Guy Etchells]

Hello everyone, a question that has been foremost in my mind when posting replies for peoples queries is the ownership of the info being posted.
As an example if some-one posts a query seeking info about Bill SMITH B:c1890 in London and I find and post a reply using either the BVRI (for example) or the Latter Day Saints website am I contravening any copyright laws. I always state where I found the record and give the file or reference No.
I was subscribed with another genealogy site and many of my "reply" postings were blocked on the premise of copyright. It was stated that I could continue to do research for others provided I "wrote" the info in my own words instead of "cut & paste".
I would like to get your views on this matter so that I don't fall into the same predicament again.
I enjoy researching & whilst my own search is at a brickwall I like to try to help others when I can.

Kind Regards
Peter Euston

If you check the licence agreement of the BVRI it states -
"3. You may not copy the data, except that you may print, photocopy, or download portions of the data for your personal family history research only. You may not publish or sell any portion of the data in any format except as part of your personal family history."

This in itself stops you from cutting and pasting to mailing lists, forums etc.

Under American law the data itself would not be subject to copyright restrictions and as the BVRI is published in the USA by the LDS it follows they would be bound by the laws of the USA.

If it had been a UK database then the law is different due to the 1997 database right which would protect the data as well. A single instance of copying a limited amount of the data would not be in breach of the database right but multiple copying of small portions of the data would be.
Cheers
Guy

[Burrow Digger]

That is correct. The facts of birth/death/marriage are not copyrighted - just the method of displaying them.

But you CAN transcribe the info - rewrite it basically. That is acceptable.

You cannot copy and paste (from an index) and you cannot send images (eg census pages) to someone else. If you copy & pasted from Ancestry or British Origins or the BVRI, then yes your posts will be "blocked" for copyright errors.

If you rewrite the info, the post will not be blocked.

Of course giving the location and reference number is also acceptable.

Hope this helps.

BD