Message Boards

You are here: Message Boards > Topics > Ancestry.com > Ancestry Site Comments > THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!
Names or Keywords
All Boards   Ancestry Site Comments - Family History & Genealogy Message Board

THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

Sort
  << Prev  |  Viewing 51 - 60 of 60

Re: THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

estherkuelske  (View posts) Posted: 23 Oct 2005 5:56PM GMT
Classification: Query
Joan writes to defend Ancestry.
Ancestry stated they would follow privacy for all living people.

Joan says:In addition, a person can obtain ANY census data about himself if needed for a fee from NARA--even 1940 and later. It just isn't publicly released for 72 years.

IF your name is seen and or any siblings and or cousins, and or any living relatives with parents. IF the middle names are included.
IF other information is included THIS cannot be found
publicly. NOR does ancestry have the right to post and let it be seen!!!

Joan even states it is not public for 72 years.
SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Re: THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

jmyoung365  (View posts) Posted: 23 Oct 2005 7:06PM GMT
Classification: Query
Esther-

Please do not misquote me--nowhere did I ever say that "Ancestry stated they would follow privacy for all living people."

In the first place the sentence isn't even good English and in the second place it isn't true nor is it something I ever said.

Both Pat and I have thoroughly explained exactly what Ancesty's agreement with users and what their terms are with regard to the living--so I'm not going through that again here.

I've also explained the difference between what consitutes a public record and accessibility to those records. So I'm also not going to explain that again.

Joan

Re: THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

estherkuelske  (View posts) Posted: 23 Oct 2005 7:16PM GMT
Classification: Query
One never tries to misquote as you nicely wrote.

Go back in time. Yes, Ancestry did state living people.

Joan is stating by her own admission in the previous post Ancestry nor does she consider all living actually living.


Re: THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

pasher44  (View posts) Posted: 23 Oct 2005 7:45PM GMT
Classification: Query
Esther wrote:
Ancestry stated they would follow privacy for all living people.

Pat replies:
That statement is simply not true. Ancestry makes it quite clear that they *DO* publish information on the living. Please see the Privacy Statement at http://ancestry.com/legal/privacy.htm, which states:

"Posts contributed by our members to message boards and other community areas may include information on the living. While we advise our members to be sensitive to privacy issues, we have no control over the content of these posts...

"We do republish databases that contain published information on the living, such as white pages, people finder directories and some birth, death and marriage records. The information in these databases has been gathered from public records released by governmental and other agencies, and is available elsewhere, often on the Internet.

Esther wrote:
IF your name is seen and or any siblings and or cousins, and or any living relatives with parents. IF the middle names are included.
IF other information is included THIS cannot be found
publicly. NOR does ancestry have the right to post and let it be seen!!!

Pat replies:
Privacy law in the U.S. derives primarily from the fourth amendment to the Constitution which protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures. NOTE the qualifier, "unreasonable".

In 1890, U.S. Supreme Court Justices Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis wrote a now famous article for the Harvard Law Review regarding the right of privacy and/or the "right to be left alone". http://www.lawrence.edu/fast/boardmaw/Privacy_brand_warr2.ht...
The article was written in protest of the sensational journalistic practices of the period where the most intimate details of a person's life were being published in the newspapers of the period. However, even though they roundly denounced those practices, the limitations to journalistic license they proposed included two important exceptions, i.e.
1) The right to privacy does not prohibit any publication of matter which is of public or general interest.
2) The right to privacy ceases upon the publication of the facts by the individual, or with his consent.

Those exceptions are a fair statement of the general state of the law today, i.e.
There is no protection for information that either is a matter of public record or was voluntarily disclosed in a public place. Please see attorney Ronald Standler's article at
http://www.rbs2.com/privacy.htm

As Justice Stewart said in the opinion in KATZ v. UNITED STATES, 389 U.S. 347 (1967):
"What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection."

In other words, you can claim your *name* is private, ONLY if you (or an agent acting on your behalf) has never given it out to anyone.
If your birth was recorded as required by law, it is public.
If your birth announcement appeared in a newspaper, it is public.
If you obtained a marriage license as required by law, it is public.
If your marriage was announced in a newspaper, it is public
If your name appeared in a newspaper article or obituary, it is public
If your name appears in the census, it is public.
If your name appears in a phone book, it is public.
etc. and etc.

Truly private information is protected by law, e.g. medical info, financial info, your Social Security number. But unless you have lived as a hermit, and never shared your name with anyone, your name is not "private".

Pat

uncleaned data

Pat Anibal  (View posts) Posted: 10 May 2006 10:49PM GMT
Classification: Query
What do you mean by uncleaned data?

Re: uncleaned data

jmyoung365  (View posts) Posted: 11 May 2006 2:50AM GMT
Classification: Query
An Uncleaned File is one that didn 't get processed by the living filters to show the living as Living SURNAME and listing no additional data about the living people born after 1930.

Joan

born between 1920 @1930

Pat Anibal  (View posts) Posted: 11 May 2006 3:24AM GMT
Classification: Query
What about a lot of us that are born before 1930 that are still very much alive? Do they count us as automatically dead?

Re: born between 1920 @1930

jmyoung365  (View posts) Posted: 11 May 2006 4:09AM GMT
Classification: Query
Pat-

It isn't that the US government assumes you are dead if you were born before 1930--it is merely that they themselves have already made your data public with the release of the US Census for 1930.

The value of having full information for those born 1930 and prior for genealogists is the benefit of being able to compare family tree data for the individuals with what is found on the 1930 census--it helps to catch errors and correct our files.

There is nothing in this data that is actually private anyway--names, dates, and places are not considered private information.

Joan

Re: THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

ScottDKendall  (View posts) Posted: 28 Mar 2009 8:09PM GMT
Classification: Query
You really need to review exactly what is public domain and what is copyrighted materials.

Just because it is posted on the internet does NOT make it public domain and it does not give others permission to use it or edit it at will.

Re: THANKS a lot Ancestry for respecting privacy NOT!!

pasher44  (View posts) Posted: 28 Mar 2009 11:50PM GMT
Classification: Query
You are correct that what is published on the internet is copyrighted (or not) according to the laws of the country in which it was published.

In the U.S., facts (names, dates, locations, etc.) are always public domain. They can not be copyrighted by anyone.

Pat
Results per page    << Prev  |  Viewing 51 - 60 of 60

Find a Board

Page Tools