Re: relative does not want information listed in reports

On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:47:34 -0800, Robert Heiling
<robheil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>
That's correct and I've as yet to see that RIGHT backed up with an authoritative
source. "Public domain" also gets tossed around quite a bit. Let's consider
copyrighted works for a moment. There are many that can be viewed by the public
in bookstores and libraries. Is that what people have in mind when they speak of
"public domain". Try to publish those without permission and you'll see what
happens to your bank account.

But wait a second. Those works are composed of words that you'll find in any
dictionary. Aren't they in the "public domain"? Doesn't that mean that those
works are just a collection of a word here and a word there that are all in the
public domain? Therefore, don't we have a RIGHT to publish?
<more snipped>

What is protected by copyright (and what isn't) is pretty well
defined. For example (relating to genealogy) on-line obits in
newspaper sites might be copyrighted, but the facts presented in the
obit are not. This means (I think... I'm not trained as a lawyer) that
I can copy and use the dates, names of relatives mentioned, place of
birth, spouse name, etc. but if I copy the entire obit, I'm probably
violation the copyright.

In actual practice, If I select the obit of a relative and place that
in the notes section of my genealogy database, I'm probably not in
violation (as I've selected only a portion of the obituaries that were
presented) and particularly not if I site the source of the obit (we
all document our source, don't we?)

Now, one would suppose that whoever wrote the obit for their relative
would have no problem with that information going into a database and
being published on the web.... yet, some of the individuals cited in
the obit tend to complain when they see that information "out there"
on my web page. It probably isn't "resonable" for them to be
concerned, since the information was already "out there" on a
different web page, yet there is a need to accomodate their wishes.

Unfortunately, I've had experience with relatives who became a bit
upset with information NOT being included in an obit, and others who
became upset on seeing the same kind of information published. There's
no way to avoid problems in advance without checking everything with
everyone (a practice that I encountered often when still employed).
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: relative does not want information listed in reports
    ... "Public domain" also gets tossed around quite a bit. ... newspaper sites might be copyrighted, but the facts presented in the ... obit are not. ... private database. ...
    (soc.genealogy.computing)
  • Re: relative does not want information listed in reports
    ... "Public domain" also gets tossed around quite a bit. ... newspaper sites might be copyrighted, but the facts presented in the ... obit are not. ... The major difference between publishing something in the Podunk Planet and publishing it on www.freedata.org is the ease of retrieval and the scale of dissemination. ...
    (soc.genealogy.computing)
  • Re: relative does not want information listed in reports
    ... "Public domain" also gets tossed around quite a bit. ... newspaper sites might be copyrighted, but the facts presented in the ... obit are not. ... You've brought that upon yourself by your choice of publishing living people. ...
    (soc.genealogy.computing)
  • Re: relative does not want information listed in reports
    ... "Public domain" also gets tossed around quite a bit. ... obit are not. ... to my private database. ... You've brought that upon yourself by your choice of publishing living people. ...
    (soc.genealogy.computing)
  • Re: Obituary
    ... A death notice? ... Some of deceases' relatives live in Dundee and ... Why should anybody have an obit in any paper anywhere? ... commercial decision made by each paper editor independently. ...
    (soc.genealogy.britain)