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