Blog - The Ancestor Hunt

Family Search - Sorry - No Cigar

4/30/2013

First of all I wish to express my thanks for all the terrific results that I have been able to find on the various iterations of the FamilySearch website. The earliest that I remember was when I found my great grandparents marriage information, and was introduced to the Braunhart branch of my family tree. This branch, and the relatives that I have found have given me great joy as I have traveled the path to find my ancestors.

So THANK YOU, FamilySearch.

Recently this organization (which has provided the genealogy community with so much free information) has introduced some well-designed (in my view) capabilities that allow users to enter their family tree information, and upload photos and stories about their ancestors.

I had previously chosen to make my ancestors' photos and stores available via a couple of family history websites that I had created and currently own. That way at least I had some level of control. This was a personal choice at that time.

In reviewing the new FamilySearch tree, photos and stories features, I asked myself why would I want to put all of MY research on someone else's website? You should know that I am not a big fan of the "One World Tree" concept. Not because all of them have so many user submitted errors, but also because none of the sites where I have submitted trees have resulted in many "finds," with the exception of a half dozen connections I have made via Ancestry Family Tree.

I was intrigued by the new FamilySearch Photos and Stories capabilities however, so I did a little research, and this is what I found:

First of all, you must know that I am not a lawyer, nor have I had any legal training, but I have dealt for years with many hundreds of contracts in my pre-retirement profession. So I am not afraid of legal language, even if it is often difficult to decipher.

I was curious about the "ownership" issues regarding the uploaded photos and stories to the FamilySearch website, so I reviewed what is called the "FamilySearch Content Submission Agreement" which is available on the LDS.org website as a link from the Photos Agreement page, which one can get to by clicking "Photos" from the main FamilySearch web page.

There were two pertinent paragraphs that I found interesting and they are reproduced word for word below:

4. Licenses and Rights Granted to Us. By submitting content to FamilySearch, you grant FamilySearch an unrestricted, fully paid-up, royalty-free, worldwide, and perpetual license to use any and all information, content, and other materials (collectively, “Contributed Data”) that you submit or otherwise provide to this site (including, without limitation, genealogical data and discussions and data relating to deceased persons) for any and all purposes, in any and all manners, and in any and all forms of media that we, in our sole discretion, deem appropriate for the furtherance of our mission to promote family history and genealogical research. As part of this license, you give us permission to copy, publicly display, transmit, broadcast, and otherwise distribute your Contributed Data throughout the world, by any means we deem appropriate (electronic or otherwise, including the Internet). You also understand and agree that as part of this license, we have the right to create derivative works from your Contributed Data by combining all or a portion of it with that of other contributors or by otherwise modifying your Contributed Data.

and

7.
Automated Screening. We reserve the right, without obligation, to monitor and edit your Contributed Data. We use automated filtering tools to suppress Contributed Data which appears in our best judgment to pertain to a living person or which violates the FamilySearch Terms of Use or this Agreement. Although we are not obligated to do so, we reserve the right to edit your Contributed Data for any or no reason.

Again I am not an attorney but my reading of it basically says that FamilySearch can do anything they pretty much want with the photos and stories that you upload, including creating derivative works, and that they can edit your material for any reason.

Because of these restrictions as well as what appears to be the loss of rights to the material that I upload, I choose to not participate, for what I think are obvious reasons.

What do you think? Any attorneys out there that care to weigh in?

23 Comments

genealogygal2

5/1/2013 11:38:08 am

While I feel this so-called "agreement" is unethical, it doesn't surprise me. I only use Family Search for just that - to search. And with their new website design where I have to keep signing in from screen to screen, I'm not sure how much longer I'll be doing even that.

I certainly would never publish my family tree to that or any other "free" public site. That's just my personal preference. My guess is that Family Search feels that as long as it provides so many useful tools for "free", then they are entitled to reap some reward.

I don't think they're doing anything illegal. They're disclosing what they feel entitled to be able to do with any information stored on their website...after all, they're storing it for "free". My suggestion is - if an individual dislikes what Family Search says it will do with your user submitted information...don't submit any information.

Sounds simple to me.

Robb S

8/29/2013 02:18:09 am

Photos and stories are some of the capstones of family history research. Names and dates are valuable indeed, but photos and stories show and tell vividly who a person is. A census or church record gives only a piece of the puzzle. I was recently given a photo of my grandfather, who died when I was an infant. A copy now sits on my desk and another in my wallet. People say I look JUST like him. (One friend asked if he was my doppelganger!) I feel a family bond to my grandfather like I've never felt before.

I DO upload photos and stories onto familysearch. How can I withhold that knowledge from others?

What is Family Search going to do that is so terrible? It is not as if they are asking for my SSN and credit card #. Their agreement says they can distribute my photos throughout the world. (Great!) It says they have an automated filter that removes details about living people or data that violates their policy (ie. not using their information for commercial gain, or posting harmful or offensive material). OK by me. If these folks are storing all this data, it is reasonable that they set guidelines relative to the data they store.

Julie Mc

7/16/2016 12:19:13 pm

So perfectly stated Robb S. What good is any of our research if we choose to keep it all to ourselves and never share it with anyone? I am thrilled when I see that someone has added photos of my family members, that I do not have.

Also, Kenneth, I am not a lawyer either, but I would think that this is legalise for Family Search's and The Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' way of protecting themselves from legal action, in the case that they would say, use someone's photo in one of their information packets. This way someone can not say 'Hey,I didn't give permission for you to use my photo' bla bla bla. Everyone is so sue happy anymore.
I personally find it a wonderful way to share information in a free format for anyone who can not afford to pay for Ancestry or any number of other paid ancestral web sites. And I have had the pleasure of finding family that I would have not known otherwise. So Thank You Family Search for the work you do to connect family's!

Lori

5/1/2013 02:42:48 pm

thanks so much for sharing this info. While I had not made a decision about putting my info in Family Search I interprete the statements as you do and thus will not be submitting any data.

Bev

5/3/2013 07:14:11 am

I had interpreted Ancestry and Family Search with both having the same goal: to "hijack" my research/family data if they allowed me to use their programs. Thus, I rejected to submit my family information to either. I have shared it with family members who have submitted the information at which time I became disappointed.

Kenneth R Marks link

5/6/2013 03:17:00 am

Bev - Thank you for your thoughts. I am not sure I would go as far as to use the term "hijack" but obviously the terms of the Agreement are sufficiently vague.

Kenneth

8/29/2018 11:14:25 pm

I would & add discrimination of non-members to it, too. I am "low-income" genealogist and can't afford all these subscription rates. LDS get them for nothing. I;m getting tired of hearing from them "we can take care of that for you - join our church".

Becky Higgins link

5/6/2013 01:39:57 am

First, I applaud you for taking the time to read policies placed on data posted to FamilySearch and other sites. So many of us fail to do that.
My assumption has always been that anything I post to that site would and could be used by the public for free. After all, the bottom line purpose of the site is to help church members fulfill a religious duty. (BTW, I"m not a member of the LDS church.)
I've never been possessive of my data, including photos and such, but I understand the views of those who are. In the end, we should all make our own decisions and respect the decisions of others.
Thanks for highlighting these policies giving other genealogists good information on which to choose their options.
~Becky

Kenneth R Marks link

5/6/2013 01:53:47 am

Becky,

Thank you for your comment. I have no ax to grind at all - just trying to highlight the policies that I think folks should be aware of. And I have already stated my personal decision.

Kenneth

Lauri

5/6/2013 03:15:24 am

I have been reluctant to post any pictures to either FamilySearch or Ancestry. I had posted a picture to the ancestry message board and now that picture is all over the place attached to the wrong person. I do plan to write notes on the places I find it, but haven't as yet.
All that said, I have been using the familysearch tree and updating the information that I find with basic info like birth and death to tie the family together in hopes of then gathering additional information from others. I have only added one source, and that was because an explanation was needed. Adding sources doesn't seem easy to me. Doing what I'm doing doesn't seem to be giving away all my research as I am only adding to direct ancestors and sometimes the children. All takes a bunch of time though. We'll see if it payes off. You can indicate "watch" and supposedly will get an email when anyone updates the information.

Lauri

5/6/2013 09:33:49 pm

One more comment on this. I found an error in familysearch that it wouldn't let me correct, same person different sexes. I submitted the discrepancy to familysearch for resolution and within a couple days got a nice reply from them thanking me and saying they had fixed it.
It may be a bit different with pictures and stories, but I go back to the picture that is attached to the wrong person. I think in cases like that it should be noted somehow that it is incorrect or at least a dispute.

Zoe

5/7/2013 02:20:14 am

I'm am a retired research scientist who is fairly new to genealogy. When I first encountered this urge to keep one's research private, I was stunned. I do understand wanting to have credit and control, but I thought the point was (as in science, often) to find the truth. I listened to the RootsTech presentation about the new LDS Family Tree. Their point is that a huge percentage of research is duplicative, that is, others have already liberated the information from whatever repository or memory it was hidden in. If we work together we can be much more effective and efficient - so long as human ego doesn't get in the way. This seems admirable to me. So I have no problem adding my names and documentation to their tree. Why hide this information from unknown relatives who are searching for it? On the other hand, I won't use it for stories and photos for the reasons discussed above. Just my 2 cents.

Terry

6/12/2013 11:04:54 am

I completely agree with Zoe. Isn't the point for us all to find the truth, or the facts about our family members? To that end, Family Search has been an amazing source of information,and I feel very indebted to the organization for providing such information to us! I've put my info out there on Ancestry as a public tree, and have shared access to family members as I find them. In turn, I've been rewarded with wonderful information from other found family members! In my view, we have all benefitted from this, and have made such strides in our own research.
As an additional bonus, in my own research I actually found that an old friend of mine from school days is a cousin of my husband! They share the same g-grandfather. We would never have known this without Family Search records, and without our willingness to share online.

Dave

5/7/2013 04:08:39 am

At the most basic level, the wording is necessary so they can display your pictures without legal ramifications (and if you don't want that, why bother uploading them at all?). I do agree, though, that it seems to go too far. Giving them the ability to edit uploads as they see fit is beyond the pale.

On the bright side, they don't claim that you're assigning your copyright to them, which I've run across on other sites. Ain't happenin', folks! You're just giving them a perpetual license that goes beyond reasonable use. Needless to say, I won't be uploading, either.

Kenneth R Marks link

5/7/2013 06:14:14 am

Dave, Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Each person must make their own decision as to whether to upload or not. The problem of course, is that the "Agreement" appears to give them much more leeway than one would expect an organization to take. Only time will tell as to whether "editing" or "reasonable use" will change the original photos and stories that have been uploaded.

Dale Gunn link

5/7/2013 12:17:46 pm

In reviewing Kenneth Marks comments and further examination of the new Family Search web site I find that they pertain only to the Photos section of the site. That section is where the "FamilySearch Content Submission Agreement" is found and applies. His remarks should not apply to the Family Tree or the Search section of FamilySearch.

Kenneth R Marks link

5/7/2013 12:37:12 pm

Dale - Thank you for your comment. My writings above do not in any way intimate or imply that the Agreement pertains to either the Family Tree or the Search capability. In fact in several places I speak only about the Content Submission Agreement with respect to Photos and Stories. I am sorry that you or others drew a different conclusion, however I was quite clear.

Kenneth

Ed O'Day

5/9/2013 07:25:41 am

Kenneth,

Thanks so much for your original post, and your follow-up responses to comments made by others. FamilySearch is certainly a gem, and improves almost daily, but your concerns are mine, and reinforce my decision to adopt a "wait and see" mode before posting there any of my data or photos.

Craig

6/24/2013 02:48:48 am

I think that what the FamilySearch promise is, "if you agree to the terms of use how ever uncomfortable, then FamilySearch promises to store your submittals for all time"

Jerry

4/22/2015 06:10:56 am

Should have read the agreement before you got all you needed.

Tony Proctor link

7/26/2016 03:11:56 am

I think I see the need for those conditions documented by FamilySearch (FS). There are so many copies-of-copies for historical images that provenance cannot be guaranteed, or even determined. Neither the contributor nor FS can easily assert copyright for very old images, and these conditions therefore making sharing easier. Except if you want to display them on another website as this is prohibited by those same conditions. I have also been informed that this includes non-profit blogs, which is something of a show-stopper for me.

Christine

1/28/2018 08:35:24 am

LDS has been exceedingly helpful and kind with my searchs. My concern is not with personal information but with its use with regards to the LDS church’s religious practices. I read in a recent privacy policy that, among other uses, personal information can be used to “fulfill their mission”. I would really appreciate some information on this topic.

Steviemac

10/3/2018 08:39:56 am

I decided not to sign up for FamilySearch because they ask if you are a member of the LDS Church when you go to set up an account.