Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Starting to feel at home
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Private
    Posts
    50

    Default Copying Records for Personal Use

    Whilst I know you can't republish records from A**** and F** such as posting to this forum what are the rules on copying for own use. I.e saving the images with details on our copy and pasting transcripts to a personal folder for reference at a later date when I might not need the same sub as I've got now? Or just to show a family member at some point?

  2. #2
    Brick wall demolition expert!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    3,642

    Default

    There is, as far as I know, no problem with that. It's certainly something I do. I think what you could not do would be to publish them in a book that you "sell" to others.

  3. #3
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    9,620

    Default

    What you access from any commercial site after you've paid your subscription you can download/print for your own personal use without any restriction. Showing such records to other family members is, in my opinion, still personal use because you're just showing them 'your' family history.

    Unofficially, what you do with any information that you've paid to access is up to you. In virtually every instance unless you actually shout out to everyone 'I downloaded this parish register entry from Ancestry/FMP/wherever' the commercial companies won't have any idea that you downloaded it from their site because they only have the information because they've filmed stuff found in places such as The National Archives, local archives, etc, and you could just have easily found the details there. (Though I think the local archives have copyright 'formalities' - can't think of the word I want )

    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - “Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.”

  4. #4
    Starting to feel at home
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Private
    Posts
    50

    Default

    Wrong thread

  5. #5
    Kiltpin
    Guest

    Default

    Both the "Big Two" give us download buttons ...

    Regards

    Kiltpin

  6. #6
    Knowledgeable and helpful stepives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ireland, but born Buckinghamshire.
    Posts
    684

    Default

    I look at this way. They are our records in the first place, the tax payers keep them in our archives, and our 'public employees' preserve them, and index them. They are public records, mine, yours and ours.

    We pay good money with our subs, to whatever site we use. So why should I pay twice to view our records, just because they have filmed some, and transcribed others, when that's what we pay them to do.

    So, as I've paid twice, and downloaded some, they are mine to do with, whatever I want. Copyright of the TNA don't wash with me, as they are PUBLIC records. Yes, some are sensitive, and need to be monitored, by OUR state paid employees.

    Yes it is convenient to view them from the 'armchair', and so be it.

    We buy an electronic device to view them, we pay to access the internet to see them, and pay a commercial company to film or transcribe them, and on top of that, we but certs to further our hobby. VAT on everything I mention, so lets not say what we do is cheap.

    My records, my family history, and they can go suck eggs if they want........I've paid enough already, and I'll do what I want with them, and be damned.

    See you in Court, and even that will end up in some family history 'locker'.
    Too many bones, too much sorrow, but until I am dead, there's always tomorrow.

  7. #7
    Name well known on Brit-Gen
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    4,863

    Default

    As I understand Copyright is about ownership!

    I was in G Manchester Record Office some years ago and came across some family photo's, 11 in all. I then remembered MiL had given a talk to the TWG/WI in the early 1970's.about her family roots in Ashton on Mersey & Sale Amongst the audience was a worker for the then University who 'borrowed' the photo's, needless to say they got transferred until they reached the RO.

    On enquiring about them, I could have a disc of them for a total cost of £100+VAT and ONLY if I signed a disclaimer stating that these would only be used for family purposes etc. The photo's would have 'Copyright GMRC' mark round the edge and placing them on a subsc site would not be tolerated.................hang about these are family photo's therefore the ownership lies within the family so we can do what we like with them....No way, the person they got them from voluntary passed them over and as that person is now deceased GMRO has claimed ownership & copyright.

    Ironically when I got to sorting through a suitcase of family papers, I found 9 of the 11 original photo's.

    I am now very protective of all the photo's I have amassed, no inherited, they do not go on the internet or site tree's for pinching/ poaching and circulating but go out with a note that the Copyright lies within the family

    Sadly for GMRO they have labelled some of the photo's incorrectly, got a couple of Gt Grans muddled, are they interested in rectifying this NO!

  8. #8
    Knowledgeable and helpful
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    626

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam Downes View Post
    What you access from any commercial site after you've paid your subscription you can download/print for your own personal use without any restriction. Showing such records to other family members is, in my opinion, still personal use because you're just showing them 'your' family history.

    Pam
    That is correct Pam, what some don’t understand is the difference between showing such records to family and friends and giving them a copy of such records which is breach of copyright.

    Quote Originally Posted by stepives View Post
    I look at this way. They are our records in the first place, the tax payers keep them in our archives, and our 'public employees' preserve them, and index them. They are public records, mine, yours and ours.

    We pay good money with our subs, to whatever site we use. So why should I pay twice to view our records, just because they have filmed some, and transcribed others, when that's what we pay them to do.

    So, as I've paid twice, and downloaded some, they are mine to do with, whatever I want. Copyright of the TNA don't wash with me, as they are PUBLIC records. Yes, some are sensitive, and need to be monitored, by OUR state paid employees.

    Yes it is convenient to view them from the 'armchair', and so be it.

    We buy an electronic device to view them, we pay to access the internet to see them, and pay a commercial company to film or transcribe them, and on top of that, we but certs to further our hobby. VAT on everything I mention, so lets not say what we do is cheap.

    My records, my family history, and they can go suck eggs if they want........I've paid enough already, and I'll do what I want with them, and be damned.

    See you in Court, and even that will end up in some family history 'locker'.
    They are not our records they are government records that may contain details of our ancestors or ourselves, there is a difference.
    Yes we pay for their creation and storage in the same way as we pay for parking meters or traffic lights but just see what would happen if you took a traffic light or parking meter away.

    You personally have not paid for the records but you have paid a contribution to the overall cost of that record as has every other taxpayer in the country at the very most you have paid for a small part of a record and do not own it but have bought a licence to use a copy for your own use.
    Part of the funding for the storage of such records is the fee the record office gets in subscriptions and licence fees, by reproducing such records without paying for a reproduction licence you are stealing from other family historians.

    Incidentally family history has never been cheaper, even the cost of certificates as a proportion to household income has never been cheaper.

    Quote Originally Posted by geneius View Post
    As I understand Copyright is about ownership!

    I was in G Manchester Record Office some years ago and came across some family photo's, 11 in all. I then remembered MiL had given a talk to the TWG/WI in the early 1970's.about her family roots in Ashton on Mersey & Sale Amongst the audience was a worker for the then University who 'borrowed' the photo's, needless to say they got transferred until they reached the RO.

    On enquiring about them, I could have a disc of them for a total cost of £100+VAT and ONLY if I signed a disclaimer stating that these would only be used for family purposes etc. The photo's would have 'Copyright GMRC' mark round the edge and placing them on a subsc site would not be tolerated.................hang about these are family photo's therefore the ownership lies within the family so we can do what we like with them....No way, the person they got them from voluntary passed them over and as that person is now deceased GMRO has claimed ownership & copyright.

    Ironically when I got to sorting through a suitcase of family papers, I found 9 of the 11 original photo's.

    I am now very protective of all the photo's I have amassed, no inherited, they do not go on the internet or site tree's for pinching/ poaching and circulating but go out with a note that the Copyright lies within the family

    Sadly for GMRO they have labelled some of the photo's incorrectly, got a couple of Gt Grans muddled, are they interested in rectifying this NO!
    Copyright is nothing to do with ownership, if you buy a book from a bookshop you own the book but you do not own the copyright of the book that still lies with the author.

    In the case of the photos you mention the GMRO have stolen the copyright and are in the wrong (unless your MiL transferred their copyright to the TWG/WI or university when she gave her talk).
    The fact that the photos were borrowed rather than given adds weight to this assumption as would the negatives if you could find them also.

    Cheers
    Guy
    As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

  9. #9

    Default

    It is my understanding that the information is public, the images are copyright so download for your personal use then transcribe into your records and give them to anyone you like
    Sadly, our dear friend Ann (alias Ladkyis) passed away on Thursday, 26th. December, 2019.
    Footprints on the sands of time

  10. #10
    Kiltpin
    Guest

    Default

    We must not confuse the "artefact" and the "image of the artefact". These are two totally different things. The government, or council, or what ever official body owns the copyright to the records they, or the people or organisations reporting to them, have created. That is the important point - who created the artefact? If I take a picture or a scan of that artefact, I have created another artefact and I hold the copyright to that artefact. And I may do what I like with that copyright - publish it or not and in what ever form I like.

    There is currently a grey area. If you pay for a record from an authority - strictly speaking they have created the image which you then view and or download. The copyright still resides with them. If you then print that image, that printed artefact is still their copyright. For you to get the copyright, you must then scan the image and print the subsequent scan. THAT new artefact is copyrighted to you. A bit of a faff, definitely a waste of time and paper, but a sure fire way of staying on the right side of the law.

    So where is the grey area? Well, it comes down to pornography. Having certain images on your computer has for a long time been illegal. No problems there - the law was easy to understand and obey. But time and technology moved on. Netflixs, Amazon Prime, Catch-up TV meant that we all could stream films and TV straight on to our computers. Well, not all those shows were Wind In The Willows! The Government created a law, which in effect says that if you go on to a site and look at an illegal image on your computer screen, but not down loading it, you are guilty of an offence. The law says "creating an image on the computer screen".

    And that is the grey area. If you create the image - you hold the copyright. OR Have they created the image and they still hold the copyright. Well it can't be both. The Government says that the computer owner is the creator and the NRO and all the County Records Offices are saying no, no, no!

    Clear as mud? Yes, I agree. But internationally, whoever creates the artefact holds the copyright. Until that changes, that is what we must abide by.

    Regards

    Kiltpin

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: