Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 05:43:51 -0500 From: Roy Stockdill <roystock@compuserve.com> Save Address Block Sender Subject: UK's Data Protection Act Dear all It seems to me that we worry far too much about the DPA! I do not believe it was ever intended to apply to genealogists when it was first drawn up. The basic intention was to protect the rights of ordinary citizens viz a viz information held on them by government depts, local authorities, companies and, especially debt collecting agencies. Like most laws, unfortunately, it became a snowball that rolled out of control and became an all-encompassing, catch-all monster. As I understand it, an individual who keeps information on a computer as part of their hobby - and that obviously includes family history - does not have to register under the Act if the information is for their own private use. FHSs do have to register if they keep their membership list on computer (which I imagine most do). As it happens, the Journal of One-Name Studies, the quarterly publication of the Guild of One-Name Studies, for which I do the design and layouts, has just published in the October issue a brief story confirming that from October 24 1998 the provisions of the DPA are extended to paper records as well. We will be publishing in the next issue in January a longer piece explaining the implications of this for genealogists. Elsewhere in the October Journal of One-Name Studies we have a six-page special on the subject of "privacy and the genealogist" to which I have contributed one of the main articles. Many people will already know my views from an earlier article in Family Tree Magazine, November 1997, but I am one of those who abhors secrecy and censorship and believes that too many genealogists are over sensitive and pussyfooting about so-called "sensitive" information and about publishing birth dates etc of living people. Where's the big deal in it? I believe we are purveyors of truth, not self appointed censors, and we should be able to feel free to publish as much information as possible. As part of my article, I make the following point:- anything that appears in records which are clearly in the public domain, i.e. births/marriages/deaths, and which anyone can access on payment of the appropriate fee, cannot possibly be regarded as "private". Full stop - no argument! Suppose you then publish that information in a newsletter or on a web page? Technically, yes, you might be in breach of the DPA - but can anyone seriously see the legal authorities going to the expense and inconvenience of actually prosecuting a genealogist for revealing something that was available to anyone in public records, anyway? Of course not - such a prosecution would be an utter nonsense!!! If anyone wishes to see my article in full, I am content to e-mail a copy. Roy in Hertfordshire UK The Stockdill Family History Society (Guild of One-Name Studies, FedFHS) STOCKDILL/PREST/YELLOW/BOLTON/WORSNOP/ GIBSON/MIDGLEY/BRACEWELL/BRADLEY/MOODY in Yorkshire North & West Ridings MEAD/YOUNG in Somerset, Wiltshire & Gloucestershire Web page of the Stockdill Family History Society:- http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/roystock Twice-yearly journal/newsletter "White Rose" dedicated to our Yorkshire ancestry