Bill, You are correct and I do use the data as a guideline or a trail to follow but we do have to back it up with documentation. Most often tho, I find carbon copies in the family data....which is inevitable. I have gotten my money's worth time after time just accessing the census data. As stated before I don't know how I could research without it. Joyce Gaston Reece ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill" <wmwillis@earthlink.net> To: <copyright@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [COPYRIGHT] professional > Joyce > >> Well, you'all know as well as I do that 95% of the time when you >> retrieve >> data from someone it isn't documented data. > > I think you are being generous here. Just based on Ancestry Family > Trees I suspect that the percentage of folks > who recognize that this something that should be done is far less > than 5%. > >> If we're going to be required to retrace somebody else's data we >> may as well >> start from scratch and do the work ourselves....which is usually >> easier. > > Well, yes, of course. Though I don't think its easier to simply > start from scratch. > Ultimately all genealogy has to be both verified and validated----you > have to check (verify) where your source says they found something--- > just to be sure that > they got it right; then you have to show that its also true > (validate). Not easy to do when there's so many things that have to > be checked. > But it is easier if you have a good family history to start with, and > retraceing someone elses steps may actually be easier to do. > (Probably not as much fun, though.) > > For myself, I often use the data I find on the web to sketch things > in. A lot of things remain only in the sketched in state. If the > way someone says something seems to be particularly effective I'll > quote them (small amounts), and source them. Often I'll > provisionally accept their conclusions, but in that case I insert the > word "fide" before the citation. In otherwords, I'm temporarily > taking their word for it. On the other hand, if its just data, not > narrative, and they provide no source, there's not much point in > citing them as the source of the data. I can use their information > as a clue in looking where to look for the underlying documentation, > but their own work (even though I got the data itself from them) has > no real intrinsic value except as a pointer. Its a work in progress, > and when I find the ultimate basis for the information in a primary > document, that's what I will cite. > >> I've state before and I'll state again....we can copyright until >> He__ freezes over but if we don't have the means to legally back up >> said >> copyright, then what use is it. I realize that some of you here >> are very >> knowledgeable about copyright issues but most of us aren't. > > That's always the problem with a legal system. There are no free > rides. Unless you are willing to go through the > legal process, you don't really have much option. Some battles can > be one, and if the return is worth the effort, should be fought. > But usually its not worth the effort. Ultimately, the truth is that > few of us write so well and cogently that our words are really worth > the effort to protect. > > Bill > > ------------------------------- > 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 > >