In a message dated 9/1/2007 12:25:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, richardpence@pipeline.com writes: I had been in touch with the person who posted the material and he agreed that he indeed was not a descendant Richard- I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that someone has no right to post genealogical data about a family unless he is a blood descendant of the family. I just wanted to make certain that no one misinterpreted your statement above to imply that. In your situation the person agreed to remove the data because you held copyright to it--not because the poster wasn't a descendant of the line, right? Joan ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Now, Joan, you are selectively reading. Of course I didn't mean to imply any such thing and I'm guessing you already know that. <g> What I said was that this person took my _copyrighted_ narrative on one my ancestors, put it on his web site, said - wrongly - that he was descended from the fellow. After much back-and-forth Genealogy.com acknowledged my copyright and said they would remove the material. However, by that time, the fellow agreed to add my copyright to the material and to say it was used with my permission. He also agreed with me that he had incorrectly assumed he was a descendant. Since he now knew he wasn't a descendant, my material was no longer of interest to him so he removed it. I don't give a hoot who claims whom as an ancestor, rightly or wrongly, or what he or she posts. I just object to them posting what is obviously my copyrighted material. The fact that there was erroneous genealogy was a side issue and had nothing to do with my copyright claim. But, of course, I zealously try to clean up those messes, too. <g> I hope I made it more clear this time. Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: <JYoung6180@aol.com> To: <copyright@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 1:07 AM Subject: Re: [COPYRIGHT] Ancestry and Web pages > > In a message dated 9/1/2007 12:25:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, > richardpence@pipeline.com writes: > > I had been in touch with the person who posted > the material and he agreed that he indeed was not a descendant > > > Richard- > > I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that someone has no right to post > genealogical data about a family unless he is a blood descendant of the > family. I > just wanted to make certain that no one misinterpreted your statement > above to > imply that. In your situation the person agreed to remove the data > because > you held copyright to it--not because the poster wasn't a descendant of > the > line, right? > > Joan > > > > ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL > at > http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > COPYRIGHT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

> In your situation the person agreed to remove the data because > you held copyright to it--not because the poster wasn't a > descendant of the > line, right? Again, that misunderstands the nature of a copyright. The information/ data is not copyrightable. Its the original creative work, the narrative that's copyrightable.