Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who do you think has rights to say what is done with a person's written histories? What about if that person is deceased and has living children? What if they were typed and consolidated by one of those children? I have a family member who made public the history of a deceased family member without discussing it with the person's children.
If there are living children, do those children have rights to that history, or can anyone make whatever use they want of them? If they aren't copyrighted, are they fair game?
Looking for opinions. If anyone knows from a legal standpoint, that would be great.
You do not have to register a copyright. If you wrote it, you automatically own the copyright, even if you never publish what you wrote. That right spans the life of the author plus seventy years. It passes to the estate when the author dies. If it was published the rules vary. See the links.
Looks like the kids have a copyright violation case if we are talking about a narrative and not just pages of dates and facts.
Are you talking about a written narrative, like a memoir, or just the genealogical facts?...Looks like the kids have a copyright violation case if we are talking about a narrative and not just pages of dates and facts.
There are two important points to consider: 1) Does the published work copy the wording of the original narrative or does it simply contain the same material; 2.) are the facts in the narrative available from other sources.
The problem with histories of recent family members is that it is very easy to say, "Oh, my mother told me thus and such about Uncle Harry's boozing," or "Aunt Minnie used to said that Cousin Grace beat her kids." And it becomes very hard to prove that even personal anecdotes couldn't have had another source.
You do not have to register a copyright. If you wrote it, you automatically own the copyright, even if you never publish what you wrote. That right spans the life of the author plus seventy years. It passes to the estate when the author dies. If it was published the rules vary. See the links.
Looks like the kids have a copyright violation case if we are talking about a narrative and not just pages of dates and facts.
It is a narrative, yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu
There are two important points to consider: 1) Does the published work copy the wording of the original narrative or does it simply contain the same material; 2.) are the facts in the narrative available from other sources.
The problem with histories of recent family members is that it is very easy to say, "Oh, my mother told me thus and such about Uncle Harry's boozing," or "Aunt Minnie used to said that Cousin Grace beat her kids." And it becomes very hard to prove that even personal anecdotes couldn't have had another source.
It is direct quotes, sometimes whole paragraphs. The specifics in the narrative are not available from other sources. They are very specific, and verbatim from the written history.
Does it make a difference that a few places say "according to so and so's written history"?
I'm a firm proponent of copyright protection. But in genealogy, I think we need to have some reason as well. Copyright protection is there to protect the commercial rights of the holder. And most of what we're talking about in genealogy, there is no money to be made from it. If you publish your family's history - you'd be lucky to get even half of the money you expend on it back, by selling them. Trust me. I've published books.
But when it comes to thinks like the OP talks of, I have a hard time finding outrage over it. Where's the harm in sharing the information? It sounds like the offense is that one of the kids consolidated and typed it, but a third party made it public. Like it's a matter of the original typist not getting credit.
I fail to see where's the harm in sharing the hard work done by the deceased relative?
While my instance is clearly public domain materials, I will forever be grateful to a distant relative (not a descendant of any of the writers) who published a group of about 50 family letters written by three of my ancestors back home to her ancestor. If they'd been written more recently, it'd be a technical violation. But who cares!!! I'd never of had access to the fabulous information in them had she not published them.
IMO, and I'm no lawyer, narratives freely given do not generate any legal rights.
Actually, with new works you don't need to assert copyright protection to have it -- it comes automatically. Even my post here is protected as I write it.
Actually, with new works you don't need to assert copyright protection to have it -- it comes automatically. Even my post here is protected as I write it.
Correct.
Last edited by bjh; 02-03-2011 at 08:05 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
