"But other protections (arrangement, style, content, etc) can expand the scope of claim. Otherwise, many people who gather information of all types would not bother to do so unless they felt their work had some form of protection." Whether people *feel* their work has some form of protection, and whether their work actually *does* have some form of protection -- are two different matters. It is hard to imagine an arrangement of a cemetery transcription that would constitute creative, and hence copyrightable, material. Alphabetical or geographical order certainly are not sufficiently creative to qualify. Certainly, if the author chose to describe the cemetery, or individual portions of it, or took photographs of the cemetery, those things would be copyrightable. My intention of bringing up this point of intellectual property law is to ask whether the County Historical Society was within its legal right to do what was done. I speak as someone who has done his own share of transcribing or indexing original documents for genealogy publication. My personal feeling is that I could not care less if others used my work. That was the whole point of my doing the transcription, that as many people as possible use the results. It wasn't to get credit.

http://170.94.178.70/brown/cemetery/cemetery.htm

Here is an important thing to consider, in this ongoing discussion of the Greene Co. Web pages. Materials such as cemetery transcriptions may not be copyrightable. They are only collections of facts, not creative works, and both federal statute, the U.S. Copyright Office, and the U.S. Supreme Court have made clear that facts are not in themselves copyrightable; there must be original and creative work involved. Mere "sweat of the brow" (i.e. we worked hard on it), the Supreme Court has written, is not enough evidence that *creativity* was involved. Nor can such simple arrangements as alphabetical order or chronological order be considered creative arrangements of facts. What I am trying to say is that no person or organization can hold copyright to the facts contained on the gravestones of cemeteries, and mere transcription of those facts does not create a copyrightable work. I would be glad to provide more information and sources on this legal point should anyone ask. -Steve

In a message dated 7/27/99 11:46:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, walloon@mailbag.com writes: << It is hard to imagine an arrangement of a cemetery transcription that would constitute creative, and hence copyrightable, material. Alphabetical or geographical order certainly are not sufficiently creative to qualify. >> Sorry, I probably should have added a small bit of explaination. I have many cemetery books done by people who live in the local areas and are familar with the history and people of those areas. The cemetery books (and other such works such as census') are Annotated with addtional information. Parents/grandparents names, place of birth, marriage info, known children, military info. That's what I mean by more than a *grocery* list. And yes, many, many people like yourself, gather this information and have it placed on a website or posted in a e-mail List for the benefit and use of the general public. While freely distributed to others, this information *belongs* to originators of that information. And work/results/arrangements would be covered under copyright protection, unless I have mis-read everything so far on this matter wrongly. The Web has broadened the scope of copyrights and an individual's right to their work. The best example was the recent attempt by Yahoo/GeoCities to claim all rights of use and distribution to anything that was placed on their websites. Gloria raglady@aol.com

In a message dated 7/27/99 9:37:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, walloon@mailbag.com writes: << What I am trying to say is that no person or organization can hold copyright to the facts contained on the gravestones of cemeteries, and mere transcription of those facts does not create a copyrightable work. >> Steve: You probably are right if all transcribers did was make out a "grocery-style" list of cemetary headings. Many I've seen add a bit more than that. And yes, just "sweat of the brow" is not enough to claim copyright status. But other protections (arrangement, style, content, etc) can expand the scope of claim. Otherwise, many people who gather information of all types would not bother to do so unless they felt their work had some form of protection. One (of many) excellents sites to read about copyrights is: http://www.genealogy.com/genealogy/14_cpyrt.html Another, particularly in view of all the information that is posted on the internet is: http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html Gloria raglady@aol.com ô¿ô

Hi all, Wanted to post my Greene County interest once again (it has been a while). I am interested in find and speaking to any descendants of the following William BOYD who was born approximately 1805 in TN. I do have some TN information, but I will concentrate on that for Greene County. William BOYD, wife Nancy ? and all of the below family, with the exception of the youngest [D.F.L. BOYD] are listed in the 1850 Macon Co TN. 1860 all of the children, with the exception of Robert Lauderdale BOYD, show up in the Greene Co census without the parents. A Goodspeed write-up on son, Martin BOYD, states ".. came to Arkansas with his father when a child, where the latter died shortly after.." The youngest child David F.L. BOYD was born in TN in 1855, therefore they left TN sometime after 1855. I don't know what the attraction was to Greene County. I have surmised that they settled there due to their father's death. A few years later, some of Robert Lauderdale BOYD's children came to the Greene County/Mississippi County areas to live and stayed for quite some years. Here are some of the descendants of William and Nancy BOYD: Descendants of William Boyd 1 William Boyd 1805 - +Nancy 1811 - 2 Robert "Bob" Lauderdale Boyd 1832 - 1897 +Locky Ann Sullivan 1834 - 3 Mary E. Boyd 1855 - 1857 3 Nancy Jane "Bug" Boyd 1857 - 1912 +Samuel Lafayette Morrison 3 Josephine Ann Boyd 1858 - 1896 +William G. Galbraith *2nd Husband of Josephine Ann Boyd: +C.P. Hewlett 3 Martha Ann L. Boyd 1860 - 1943 +Wilson M. Stinson 3 Marion Augustus "Gus" Boyd 1863 - 1930 +Josephine E. ? 3 James "Jim" Wesley Boyd 1865 - 1895 +Emmet "Cherry" Fielder 1876 - 1966 3 Thomas Jefferson Boyd 1867 - 1937 +Margaret F. Dillehay 3 Robert Arnette Boyd 1870 - 1927 +Etta B. Wood 3 Maud Elenora Boyd 1872 - 1931 +John Dellahay *2nd Husband of Maud Elenora Boyd: +William Franklin Claiborne 1857 - 1938 3 Baby Boyd 1875 - 1875 3 John "Johnnie" A. Boyd 1876 - 1963 2 John R. Boyd 1833 - +Sophia A. 1838 - 3 William Thomas Boyd 1858 - 3 David Pinkney C. Boyd 1859 - 1910 +Amanda "Manda" E. Williams 1861 - 1910 3 Joseph S. Boyd 1862 - 3 Lewis Boyd 1867 - +Annie Counce 2 William F. C. Boyd 1834 - 2 Mary Boyd 1838 - 2 Andrew J. Boyd 1840 - 2 Francis M. Boyd 1842 - 2 George W. Boyd 1844 - 2 Martin W. Boyd 1846 - 1885 +Martha J. McMillin 1842 - 1911 3 Onie J. Boyd 1869 - +J. T. Carr 3 Alice Boyd 1871 - +William P. Martin 1860 - 3 Clara Boyd 1877 - +Howard L. Kuykendall 1869 - 1956 3 Selma Boyd 1880 - 1970 +George S. Self 1876 - 1945 2 Paul Whitfield "Whit" Boyd 1848 - 1909 +Nancy Ann Clark 1846 - 1928 3 Ida Boyd 1872 - 1904 +Dock Adams 3 Joseph Arthur Boyd 1874 - 1958 +Elizabeth Mary Miller 1884 - 1971 3 Saddie Boyd 1876 - 1877 3 Aubrey Boyd 1879 - 1886 3 Alex Markham Boyd 1882 - 1942 +Sallie Etta Miller 1885 - 1919 3 Elmer Cleveland Boyd 1885 - 1932 +Tennessee Winn 3 Dock Leslie Boyd 1887 - 1961 +Myrtle Ellington 1891 - *2nd Wife of Dock Leslie Boyd: +Helen Mae Ellis Prichard 1908 - 1984 3 Annie Boyd 1890 - 1959 +Dillon B. Branch 1884 - 2 David Feenie L. Boyd 1855 - 1933 *1st Wife of David Feenie L. Boyd: +Martha Ruth "Mattie" Leslie 1858 - 1878 #2nd Wife of David Feenie L. Boyd: +Nancy Goodwin 1854 - 1900 There are some other BOYD's in the area that are affiliated with this line, but I am unable to place them properly. In addition I have further generations, but felt this enough to get started. I am looking forward to hearing from anyone regarding this line. :) Robin J.

OK, I posted the article to ARGreene-L that came from the Rootsweb newsletter. My point was hoping someone with the Greene Co Society would read it and consider it as an article of integrity and commonsense, written from a reliable source, and perhaps it would help them to understand they can benefit from adding free information to the web. Here's a new thought. If I'm not mistaken, since this list is Rootsweb, then the emails are all archived. If that's true, anyone who has Greene Co info can send it to the list, and it can then be 'searched' by anyone through Rootsweb's new search engine by the surname (or whatever) they are researching. Carey, let us know if I'm right in that this list is archived. If so, I for one, will be glad to start submitting anything I have for Greene Co. But Dee, before you shame everyone for 'bashing' the Greene Co 'volunteers', remember, most of us writing to this list were also 'volunteers'... for the Greene Co webpage. Several of us were right in the middle of transcribing a census the hard way, when it appeared that our efforts were no longer wanted. Just something to think about. OK, let's move on to happier thoughts. Most of the time this list is used for someone looking for a family name. If they receive a reply, it is most often private, or I miss the reply somewhere. Anyone need any lookups? I have the 1860 and 1870 Greene Co., AR census records at home. Someone else said they had printed off the cemetery records before they were removed. I have some, but not all. I also have Greene Co. Marriage Book #2 (Book #1 destroyed in a fire). Several members of this list may have sent off to Greene Co for all marriages of a particular name. If so, maybe you can post them to this maillist. Anyone have anything else to submit? Thanks, Cindy (Morrow) Dickinson Springdale, AR

So what did happen that caused such an uproar over michael and the website. I'm still in the dark. -----Original Message----- From: ARGREENE-D-request@rootsweb.com <ARGREENE-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: ARGREENE-D@rootsweb.com <ARGREENE-D@rootsweb.com> Date: Monday, July 26, 1999 12:15 PM Subject: ARGREENE-D Digest V99 #54

Have you ever been a county coordinator? Are you aware of the work involved? Yes I have and am a county corrdinator and a list mom......I DO KNOW first hand the time, work and effort it takes for these projects (and I think I do a great job)......but without the help of all my list members and the folks visiting my county site, it would not be what it is today.......I also had to take it over at a very bad time...... I am not saying nothing bad about the list mom for Greene County now......but the Society or whomever has destoryed enough that it will take years to rebuild and I for one will never buy another book from them.......NEVER.......I still say they are Childish, Selfish and many more words.........My site has sold more books for the local Society here recently than they would have sold.......think of the exposure!!!!!! Thank you and that will be the last I have to say.........pj -- Paula (pj) Howard Thompson pj@apex.net Weakley Co, TN Coordinator http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnweakle Listmom of Weakley Co,Tn Rootsweb Home Page http://www.apex.net/users/pj/mama.htm (Under Construction) My Surnames of Weakley County, Tennessee McCLAIN JONES McCLURE MORRISON STARK/STARKS TIBBS JOHNSON KEMP HART HOWARD HUNGERFORD ALDERDICE WILLIAMS "May we all search ours Roots to form the Branches of our Tree"

In a message dated 7/26/99 2:30:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, pj@apex.net writes: << list mom for Greene County >> Actually, it should be *List Dad*, as I learned to my chagrin. <smile> Anyone with a *gender-neutral* name should have to put either M or F by their name. My last word also (I hope), to extend a Big Thank You to everyone involved in websites, lists and other venues of information made available to the public at large. Your dedication, hardwork, extraordinary sense of giving and sharing with the genealogical community of family researchers is very much appreciated and too often not recognized or just taken for granted. And for the person who made a snide reference to *internet genealogists*. You should be aware that the internet has made a world of difference for people who have physical disabilities and are unable to go libraries and Family History Centers. Yes, there is bad information on the internet, but there is bad information in Heritage Books, County biographies, Census data, obituaries, DAR info, etc. All aspects of information must be checked out, verified, re-verifed..and still may have to throw in an element of common sense. Have a grandfather, who by his death record, died Jan 5,1932. Weekly paper said on the 7th that he was getting better after bout with typhoid and pneumonia. Next week's edition of the 14th reported his death of the 13th. Turns out he actually died in the early AM of the 6th. When family reported, they said he died *last night*, so the 5th was entered. Gloria

My question is RootsWeb paying people to gather info for them now. you said you got a pay check for runing this list. There may be more info posted if people did not clame it as theri own when some one else transtribed it. And work hard to get it to the net. If it keep up there will be even less info on the net. Other than paying for membership to get to it. Then none of us will have a place to meet other researchers. This is my hobby and I have never ask anyone for one penny for anything I have furnished. and lots of people have made connection from out pages. The Green Co list has not had any genealogy info on it for close to a year now. and it is full of junk the last few days. and what has happend is probably made the ones who will help change their mind. Carey Rogers wrote; ARGREENE-L@rootsweb.com Let me correct one statement in the following post. The responsibility for this list is mine and mine alone. I'm not connected with the Genealogical Society except that I'm a member. I believe that the discussion is about the fate of the Greene County Genweb site. The site and the email list are separate. When they asked for volunteers to take over the list I replied. I received responsibility for the list along with the big paycheck. :-) I don't have anything to do with the web site.

Hi all, I had sent this privately to Doug, but I think it is worth everyone reading. >I live in Greene Co., AR and am a frequent user of the genealogy room. > It was not the Greene Co. Genealogical Society as a group, who pulled >those records. The folks who walked the cemeteries and who authored the book >were upset that what they had done to help the society was being offered >free on the web. I really don't think they are extremely knowledgable about >computers, they just did an awful lot of work (about 7 years worth) to help >out the society and didn't want to see them lose out. > To be honest, the society does a whole lot to encourage and help >researchers. There are volunteers, who do look ups, run to the courthouse, >copy microfilm, books etc. for individuals who send or call their requests >to the society. These are truly helpful people who want to make things >easier for everyone. Not very many of them, though, are up on computers and >the benefits etc. There are a few folks in the soc. who are working to get >things up to date, so I think if they are given a little more time, more >info will be provided to the websites. > Just for clarification. The website that now hosts the Greene Co >records is a rootsweb site. It is hosted by two members of the Gen. Soc. who >disagreed with the removal of Michael's records. They are new at creating >websites, so they too are doing the best that they can. There is also a >Greene Co. website (as has been mentioned) on Bill Couch's Arkansas pages. >He has a link to the Greene Co library, which also is a resting place for >most of Michael's data. Just minus the cemetery records. > I guess that's just about it. >Don't be too hard on those folks. If anyone wants the dates, they can find >the names on the index and then call the library or write the gen. soc. and >ask for the dates. Someone will look them up for them. >Yes, it would be just as easy to have them on the website and avoid the >hassle, just give them time to get used to the idea of the internet. >Carol > >

-- [ From: Dee Burr * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- To those complaining about the Greene Co. Webpage. There are now 3 genweb pages. The origianal ARgenweb maintained by Bill Couch http://www.couchgenweb.com/arkansas/ The one accessible by the USGenweb http://www.rootsweb.com/~argreene/greene.htm and the one maintained by the Greene Co. Library. http://170.94.178.70/brown/default.htm Between the three of them, there is a lot of data. I think that only the cemeteries information has been pulled. Yes, I am sorry the cemetery information was pulled. With a lot of families in Greene Co. it was very convenient. But, as a researcher from the "time before computers", one just has to go back to the old ways. Write or email the library. They will look it up for you. Or email a lookup volunteer. But before the Webmaster bashing continues, THINK. These people DO NOT HAVE TO VOLUNTEER THEIR TIME AT ALL... and I mean VOLUNTEER. Volunteer means no pay, just a lot of work. Have you ever been a county coordinator? Are you aware of the work involved? Be thankful there are people out there that loves genealogy and are trying to get as much information as possible available on the net. Continue bashing and everyone who maintains a webpage will quit and the "computer genealogist" will be up a tree without a paddle. Dee Burr --

Thank you for the courtesy of your reply and serving as the list coordinator. Your information notwithstanding, the fact remains that once-posted cemetery data is gone. This was within the purview of the list and the users who volunteered data. I am curious as to how the genealogical society co opted the information and removed it. The very public list was placed there by your predecessor and a number of volunteers participated in its being corrected over time. It seems reasonable if the email list and the site are separate, as you say, then the material should not have been removed by outside parties. It further seems reasonable to assume this matter is of utmost importance to the continued success of the site and those who contribute/receive information. Failure should not be an option. Doug Park, Editor The Parke Society Newsletter Carey Rogers wrote: > Let me correct one statement in the following post. The > responsibility for this list is mine and mine alone. I'm not > connected with the Genealogical Society except that > I'm a member. I believe that the discussion is about the > fate of the Greene County Genweb site. The site and the > email list are separate. When they asked for volunteers to take > over the list I replied. I received responsibility for the list > along with the big paycheck. :-) I don't have anything > to do with the web site. > > As far as I am concerned you can share any data about > Greene County you like on this list, as long as, it has some > genealogical or historical relevance, of course. > > Carey Rogers > > -----Original Message----- > From: J. Douglas Park <jdpark@acd.net> > To: ARGREENE-L@rootsweb.com > Date: Sunday, July 25, 1999 4:41 PM > Subject: Re: Why Should Gene. Societies Give Info Away? > > >I understand the Greene Co. Gen. Society has co opted the > responsibility for > >this list from Michael with the resulting outcome that information, > e.g. > >cemetery data, is no longer freely available. Separate sources have > confirmed > >this. > > > >As I had previously provided updates and corrections to Michael on > published > >lists, we enjoyed a two way street of corrected and expanded > genealogical data. > >Neither of us charged the other for the data. More importantly, the > wider world > >of genealogists, whether professional or hobbyists, had access to > better data. > > > >I am curious who will fill the role vacated by Michael so that my > information > >can again be funneled to a site which will freely share the data. I > am only > >interested in sharing data for which there will be no charge. > > > >Doug Park, Editor > >The Parke Society Newsletter > > > > > > > >

Let me correct one statement in the following post. The responsibility for this list is mine and mine alone. I'm not connected with the Genealogical Society except that I'm a member. I believe that the discussion is about the fate of the Greene County Genweb site. The site and the email list are separate. When they asked for volunteers to take over the list I replied. I received responsibility for the list along with the big paycheck. :-) I don't have anything to do with the web site. As far as I am concerned you can share any data about Greene County you like on this list, as long as, it has some genealogical or historical relevance, of course. Carey Rogers -----Original Message----- From: J. Douglas Park <jdpark@acd.net> To: ARGREENE-L@rootsweb.com Date: Sunday, July 25, 1999 4:41 PM Subject: Re: Why Should Gene. Societies Give Info Away? >I understand the Greene Co. Gen. Society has co opted the responsibility for >this list from Michael with the resulting outcome that information, e.g. >cemetery data, is no longer freely available. Separate sources have confirmed >this. > >As I had previously provided updates and corrections to Michael on published >lists, we enjoyed a two way street of corrected and expanded genealogical data. >Neither of us charged the other for the data. More importantly, the wider world >of genealogists, whether professional or hobbyists, had access to better data. > >I am curious who will fill the role vacated by Michael so that my information >can again be funneled to a site which will freely share the data. I am only >interested in sharing data for which there will be no charge. > >Doug Park, Editor >The Parke Society Newsletter > > > >

In a message dated 7/25/99 11:02:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, bcouch@CouchGenweb.com writes: << My question is RootsWeb paying people to gather info for them now. you said you got a pay check for runing this list. >> Good Grief........ Bill, I believe that everyone recognized that Carey's statement of receiving a *big* paycheck was said with "tongue in cheek". In plain words, she was saying she took on a lot of responsiblity, hard work, gave her time, energy and dedication to this list ......as a Volunteer!! Not as a paid employee of Rootsweb. I'm not happy about the Gen. Library and what happened to the Greene County site...and Michael and the volunteers who worked hard with him. A lot of people aren't happy. I think that Carole's post earlier gave a decent explanation of what may have gone on at the beginning and middle.. As subscribers...we only became aware of the end result. One Big Mistake...was how the Genealogical Society handled this whole matter. Had they been smart, they would have made an explanation to the List as to what was happening, why it was happening and what they felt they could do to improve the Green County, Arkansas site. Carey took over this list at a very bad time and when no one else volunteered, that I know of. In the venting of our frustrations, let's make sure that innocent people don't get mud thrown at them. Gloria raglady@aol.com

I understand the Greene Co. Gen. Society has co opted the responsibility for this list from Michael with the resulting outcome that information, e.g. cemetery data, is no longer freely available. Separate sources have confirmed this. As I had previously provided updates and corrections to Michael on published lists, we enjoyed a two way street of corrected and expanded genealogical data. Neither of us charged the other for the data. More importantly, the wider world of genealogists, whether professional or hobbyists, had access to better data. I am curious who will fill the role vacated by Michael so that my information can again be funneled to a site which will freely share the data. I am only interested in sharing data for which there will be no charge. Doug Park, Editor The Parke Society Newsletter

-- [ From: Dee Burr * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- Arkansas started maintaining death certificates in 1914. These certificates had to be sent in by either the doctors or the funeral homes. Sometimes they weren't sent in. Compliance early on wasn't very good, particularly in rural areas, where people died at home and then the family just buried them. I had requested a death certificate on a gr grandfather that had died in 1951. No record. I went to the funeral home and there was the information. It had not been recorded. Also, you may believe your ancestor to have died in one county and it will be in another. The employees at the Vital Statistics may not take the time to search their files with enough care to spot the difference. The certificate could be filed under a different name than you expect. I didn't have a lot of luck getting certificates until I got my set of Death Indexes. Now, I know when to send for one. If you can locate your individual in the Arkansas Death Index, then you will get a certificate. These books are invaluable in looking up AR deaths. If you would like to purchase a set for yourself or as a donation to your library, go to: http://biz.ipa.net/arkresearch/ I have the 3 volume set of the indexes, dating from 1914 thru 1940. I will do lookups temporarily if requested. Put Death Index lookup in the subject line. Please limit your requests to one or two names. Do not ask for all in one surname. Give me as much info as you can. Name, dates, counties (if known). Dee Burr ------- FORWARD, Original message follows ------- > Date: Sunday, 25-Jul-99 01:47 PM > > From: HAPPYDI@aol.com \ America On-Line: (HAPPYDI) > To: ARGREENE-L@rootsweb.com \ Internet: (argreene-l@rootsweb.com) > > Subject: Death Certificates > > Deborah et al > Try > > Arkansas Department of Health > Division of Vital Records > 4815 West Markham Street, Slot 44 > Little Rock, AR 72205-3867 > > and send $4.00 > > I sent for a death certificate dated 6 Dec 1941. They could not find any > record. > > I hope this helps. > > Phil Di Matteo ------- FORWARD, End of original message ------- --

I agree totally. I live here in Paragould and accessed their site frequently. But, Since the site is no longer available, I have yet to do any further research. I am a very busy person, so call it lack of time, too lazy to go to the library or whatever but it has made a big difference in my research. I hope the Greene Co Gen. Soc hears our crys for the info back on the web. I was very proud to live in a county where people realize the advantages of new technology and were active enough to get it up and running. Now I wonder if they're not going backwards instead of forward. Jeff Evans -----Original Message----- From: Cindy Dickinson <jdickens@tcac.net> To: ARGREENE-L@rootsweb.com <ARGREENE-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Friday, July 23, 1999 10:45 PM Subject: Why Should Gene. Societies Give Info Away? This was in a recent newsletter from Rootsweb. It would be interesting for Greene Co Gene Soc. to read it.--Cindy WHY SHOULD A GENEALOGY SOCIETY GIVE RECORDS AWAY? by Jeffrey A. Bockman, M.B.A. <jeffb@anet-chi.com> <http://www.anet-chi.com/~jeffb/index.html> [Jeffrey Bockman is the president of the DuPage County (Illinois) Genealogical Society. This article was originally published in the FGS FORUM, Winter 1997, page 25, and is reprinted here with the author's kind permission.] There is a vast amount of family history currently available on the Internet and on CDROM that is incorrect, undocumented, or fictitious. Yet, with the growing interest in family history many searchers will stop with these easy-to-find "instant families." David E. Rencher stated in "Where In Cyberspace Are We?" (FORUM 9:2 (Summer 1997) page 3), that presently the Internet offers a search environment but "the field of electronic genealogy . . . has yet to create a research environment." Genealogy societies should be leading the way in creating a research environment by providing information so that verifying an "instant family" is as convenient as finding the family in the first place. But how? One way in which societies can help to create a research environment is to rethink traditional ways of distributing and sharing the information that they compile. The traditional method of sharing is to publish and the process is: 1. Compile information from vital records, cemeteries, ledger books, and other sources, and enter into a word or data processing program; then format and proofread. 2. Take the manuscript to a printer and have it published. 3. Store, advertise, and hopefully sell the resulting publication. A closer look at this process shows while step 1 is critical in getting the information in a form that can be shared with others, the dissemination, steps 2 and 3, is open to question. Step 2 benefits a printer/publisher while step 3 benefits a society -- but only if sales are good and income exceeds expenses. This traditional procedure has other flaws. First, distribution potential is limited. A user benefits if he or she can find the publication, but it may only be available from the society by mail or at local workshops. If it is advertised in national genealogical publications, it competes with hundreds, perhaps thousands of similar titles. Even library use is limited: users may find the book only in a local, regional or national library which specializes in genealogy. Thus, a researcher could spend more time and money trying to locate the information than in actually using the information. The market is limited, too. Few people want to purchase a publication to look up only one or two events. They have other options. They can ask the county clerk or the cemetery office to find one or two entries. Or, they may write to the genealogical society who offers searches as a courtesy or for a slight fee. A third drawback is the risk involved. The society takes all of the risk. It has to determine print quantity based upon printer volume costs, anticipated demand, and storage facilities. The society must advertise and give free copies to some libraries or for book reviews. Society volunteers must retrieve books from storage, haul, unpack, and display them at conferences, then box and return unsold books to storage. If publishing, storage and advertising costs, and the wear and tear on volunteers exceed profits, the risk has been too great. This traditional distribution channel, with its flaws, should cause societies to reexamine their ultimate goal in compiling and distributing information. If society goals are (a) to preserve and make available genealogical information; (b) to promote an interest in genealogy; and (c) to encourage proper research techniques; there may be a better way to achieve them. The target audience for the dissemination of information in published form is comprised of the society's members, people doing research in the jurisdiction, and patrons of selected libraries. This is really a very small audience. If a society seeks to share information with the widest possible audience, why not share with everybody? The Internet is the new communications frontier. Anyplace in the world is only nanoseconds away. If every society and county government put its records online a researcher who only needs information about a single event would be able look it up from home or the local library with Internet access or at an "Internet coffee shop." Ideally, if the person found the desired event from a detailed online index, he could order a copy of the certified record by entering credit card information or obtaining an invoice number. . . While many societies are beginning to discuss this issue they look at it from a personal or society viewpoint rather than from a global viewpoint. Instead, consider a wider range of benefits: Government Agencies: o Time savings from not having to look in book indexes. o Faster access by using the electronic index. o Only activity would be with paid certificate requests. o Possibly less floor space needed for index storage and access. Genealogical Society o No financial risk from over-printing. o No handling and storage, save time and costs. o Less income but less need to purchase other indexes. o Improved recognition and wider audience with home page link. o Requests for hard copy can be automated and printed on demand. Global Audience o Faster, easier access to useful research without leaving home. o Eliminates need to review online library catalogs trying to find the closest copy of a printed index. o Information could be annotated to show corrections and source. Members o Attend sessions and socialize rather than sitting in a hallway selling books. o Reduce wait for replies and save the cost of SASEs. o Achieve immediate action and results on new clues or ideas. o Could actually spend time doing research on their own family. If one of the purposes of a genealogical society is to help make information readily available then what better method is there? Societies are nonprofit organizations. What money they do realize from publication sales often goes to purchase other publications for the use of members. But there are other options. Money can be earned through workshop, class, or lecture fees. Profits can be used to disseminate information more widely: by providing additional Internet resources, Internet access at the local library or society library or office, or supporting the storage and access cost of the county GenWeb site, a society home page, or online vital record storage. Once a society is convinced of the benefits of this new and more Effective way of disseminating information, it can start small and work up to more ambitious projects: 1. Provide the following information on-line: o Places to do research, hours and holdings. o Handy guide to the type of historical information that is available. o Access instructions to vital records or the indexes. o Queries. 2. Compile indexes and make them easily available. 3. Assist counties and repositories in getting images of the actual records online with easy search and retrieval systems. If everyone would "do for others as you would like them to do for you," we could all make electronic genealogy work for us. We could be making verification of information now available in Internet's search environment quick and easy. We could be establishing research environments to complement and enhance the existing search environment, and we could be turning searchers into researchers. ______________________________

In a message dated 7/25/99 5:41:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jdpark@acd.net writes:<< I am curious who will fill the role vacated by Michael so that my information can again be funneled to a site which will freely share the data. I am only interested in sharing data for which there will be no charge. >> Your sentiments, so well expressed, are those of many on this List. My only hope is that someone carries the message to where it will do some good. In the meantime, perhaps consider placing your research results with Rootsweb on State or Counties sites or where appropriate.. on the Gen-Connect Boards for things like Wills, Deeds, Obits, etc. With the expansion of their several types of search engines, materials on Rootsweb sites get a very wide exposure. Just a thought, Gloria raglady@aol.com ô¿ô