Debbie When it got moved onto the non-paying subscriber pages no one was paying for the search capabilities. So you aren't paying to search. One world tree is a search engine also. You pay to access the search engine. It's up to you to decide if you use it or not. What ancestry was doing was providing a search engine that searched ONLY genealogical data. Yes, they cached the pages but so does every other search engine....so does your computer. Think about this...as long as the non-profit networks exist the FREE data will remain FREE. Why? Because folks like you and I are putting the data onto those sites and allowing folks access to it FOR FREE. It will be up to the individual researcher to either find it on your site or via a search engine. You can go elsewhere but that won't stop a site from being spidered and cached and if you block any spidering you'll have to send out a lot of links to get any hits because NO search engine will ever list your site. As for 'professional' genealogists....I can tell you a little something. Anything I can find on the internet that helps my client, my clients can also find. A true professional seldom does in-depth research on the internet....what's available for you is available to me. We can find basic data but can seldom use it for documentation. 99% of my clients are via the internet and all of them have indications of ancestry in the area where I live and can get to the 'hidden' information that isn't on the internet. The most reliable info on the net is primary resource information....which there is not enough of. I'm not sure if other professionals will agree with me but that's how we work. Joyce Gaston Reece ----- Original Message ----- From: <RoverLSmith@aol.com> To: <copyright@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:54 PM Subject: Re: [COPYRIGHT] Ancestry and Web pages > > It is not just nonprofit organizations or little genealogy groups who are > getting "screwed" by copyright violation on the Net. > > I pay for Ancestry to get information not easily available to me, not for > an > indexing system of information submitted by free-sharing souls. If > Ancestry > wants to index other websites they should do it through Rootsweb, and > they > should go through the home page of the web site instead of directly to the > information they want to pick out. A website is a publication, and people > are > ripping out pages of those publications and linking to them as if they are > their > own. Legal or not, it tricks people if they aren't careful and gives the > impression that the information belongs to Ancestry. > > In respect to Richard Pence's website, I have it in my favorites. If > anyone > wants to find Pence family information all they have to do is search > Google, > and his writings will pop up. If I were to link to Richard's website, I > would > go through the front page unless I had already been given permission to > do > otherwise. > The issue of linking to subpages of websites has been brought up, but I > don't know if there has been any litigation concerning this. Maybe someone > can > enlighten me. The Internet isn't fully represented in our laws yet. I know > some > webmasters that are very upset about their subpages having been linked by > for-profit organizations. > > > I'm offended by OneWorldTree and am happy to have not submitted anything > to > any Rootsweb tree. We shouldn't have to pay for our own submissions. > > What Ancestry.com has been doing is, in order to avoid providing more > useful, hard to obtain data, enlarging their site with the labor of > others, that > others intended to be free. I don't want to pay for something I can get > with a > Google search. > > The downside of these "freepages" are that Ancestry.com / Rootsweb > controls > them. Best to pay a small amount of money and go elsewhere. > > It's also true that professional genealogists crawl the Internet and grab > documents others have traveled far and paid much to obtain. The answer to > that > is to alter the documents and clearly state in a light background where > they > were obtained and when. Same with any other graphics. > > I've been approached by professional genealogist wanting my work to help > them make money. These are the people with whom I do not share. A lot of > times > they are also the people who refuse to share with an amateur in fear they > will > steal "their" information. One actually told me "Well, they never told me > where I had to get my information". Not from me, for sure. I'm all for > professional genealogists. They can do their own work, or ... At least ask > before > they copy? > > Ancestry.com and Genealogy.com are full of dirty tricks. Eventually they > will be replaced by some of the free information coming online and we > won't have > to worry about them. > > An aside -- Last time I was at the library I found books written wholly > from > information obtained from web sites, some of it very inaccurate. Many of > the > passages were large enough to not be considered fair use. Any thoughts > about > these books ... Has anyone seen them? > > Thanks. > > Debbie > > Also, cached information is good and bad. Many of us put up web pages > before > we have done enough research. These sites are full of misinformation and > don't need to be floating around the Internet for eternity. > > > > > > > > > > > > ************************************** 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 > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/981 - Release Date: 8/31/2007 > 6:13 AM > >