James Hill wrote: > I do have concerns about the ethics of such a site. A recent petition to > reduced the time census data was locked away was rejected. The rationale was > that the informants had been promised that it would be locked away for 100 > years. However, that does not seem to be a problem if there is money to be > made. I am also concerned that public records are sold in this way. Tax > payers have paid for the storage of this data over time so it should again > be free. There was no promise at the time the census was taken that it would be closed for 100 years. The decision to make it so was made by the government retrospectively in 1960. Thus certain individuals were able to use the UK's Freedom of Information Act to get the census released early. It had nothing to do with money at all. It was action by individuals who have absolutely no connection with the government, or any commercial interests, who were responsible. The census is free of charge if you go to the National Archives, but you won't be able to handle the original documents. You'll only be able to see them on film (or on a PC now). In order to make the census (or any other documents) freely available, the documents have to be filmed (or digitised) which costs money. In the case of the census it consists of household schedules which have not been available for previous censuses. So, instead of having a number of households on a page, each household has a page to itself. The original documents took up one and a quarter *miles* of shelf space. To walk from one end to the other would take approx 35 mins at a normal pace. Therefore, in order to relieve the burden on taxpayers (many of whom aren't interested in family history) and to cover the cost of the filming/digitisation, the National Archives sells a license to specific companies who will, obviously, endeavour to recoup as much of their costs as possible, if only to allow them to make further documents available. The first census that was covered by government legislation to be closed for 100 years was the 1921. However, I have heard rumblings that attempts will be made to get that legislation overturned. The next document that could be released before its anticipated date is the 1939 National Registration which was not a census so therefore not covered by the 100 year closure applicable to censuses. There is a closure period on it but it may be possible for that to be released early. The 1931 census no longer exists and there was no census taken in 1941 thus making the 1951 census the next available one. We should respect the rights to privacy of all, especially those who are not nosey genealogists and family historians :)) The information is, in any case, available from other sources which are already open to the public. I hope this explains the situation.

But there again the Irish Government is now releasing the 1911 census and it is FREE both to search and to download images.....so there is no real argument for the excessive fees charged by FMP....also take for example the more realistic charges for Scottish data from Scotlandspeople....so really FMP are milking the current trend and popularity of family history....and of course they will not be licensing the data to others such as Ancestry in the near future until they have soaked up the dosh. -------- Original Message -------- > James Hill wrote: > > >> I do have concerns about the ethics of such a site. A recent petition to >> reduced the time census data was locked away was rejected. The rationale was >> that the informants had been promised that it would be locked away for 100 >> years. However, that does not seem to be a problem if there is money to be >> made. I am also concerned that public records are sold in this way. Tax >> payers have paid for the storage of this data over time so it should again >> be free. >> > > There was no promise at the time the census was taken that it would be > closed for 100 years. The decision to make it so was made by the > government retrospectively in 1960. Thus certain individuals were > able to use the UK's Freedom of Information Act to get the census > released early. > > It had nothing to do with money at all. It was action by individuals > who have absolutely no connection with the government, or any > commercial interests, who were responsible. > > The census is free of charge if you go to the National Archives, but > you won't be able to handle the original documents. You'll only be > able to see them on film (or on a PC now). In order to make the > census (or any other documents) freely available, the documents have > to be filmed (or digitised) which costs money. In the case of the > census it consists of household schedules which have not been > available for previous censuses. So, instead of having a number of > households on a page, each household has a page to itself. > > The original documents took up one and a quarter *miles* of shelf > space. To walk from one end to the other would take approx 35 mins at > a normal pace. > > Therefore, in order to relieve the burden on taxpayers (many of whom > aren't interested in family history) and to cover the cost of the > filming/digitisation, the National Archives sells a license to > specific companies who will, obviously, endeavour to recoup as much of > their costs as possible, if only to allow them to make further > documents available. > > The first census that was covered by government legislation to be > closed for 100 years was the 1921. However, I have heard rumblings > that attempts will be made to get that legislation overturned. > > The next document that could be released before its anticipated date > is the 1939 National Registration which was not a census so therefore > not covered by the 100 year closure applicable to censuses. There is > a closure period on it but it may be possible for that to be released > early. > > The 1931 census no longer exists and there was no census taken in 1941 > thus making the 1951 census the next available one. > > We should respect the rights to privacy of all, especially those who > are not nosey genealogists and family historians :)) The information > is, in any case, available from other sources which are already open > to the public. > > I hope this explains the situation. > > > REMEMBER - The question you are asking may have already been answered. > Threaded Archives at - > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS/Archives > > Searchable Archives at - > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > E-mail message checked by Internet Security (6.0.0.386) > Database version: 5.11420 > http://www.pctools.com/uk/internet-security/ > > E-mail message checked by Internet Security (6.0.0.386) Database version: 5.11420 http://www.pctools.com/uk/internet-security/

In message <[email protected]>, Firebird <[email protected]> writes >Therefore, in order to relieve the burden on taxpayers (many of whom >aren't interested in family history) and to cover the cost of the >filming/digitisation, the National Archives sells a license to >specific companies who will, obviously, endeavour to recoup as much of >their costs as possible, if only to allow them to make further >documents available. > This rather misses the point. The National Archives would be better to *give* a license to anyone who wants it. There would thus be competition in the pricing of the digitised version and competition in the quality of the work. The National Archives would benefit by insisting on receiving a copy of the digitised data free for public perusal at the National Archives. It is rather misleading to say "endeavour to recoup as much of their costs as possible" when in reality it should be "endeavour to make as much profit as possible". That is what companies do and that is why shareholders invest in them or entrepreneurs start them. And that is why competition is important to keep prices down. Graham --

Many thanks for your comments unfortunately you have completely missed the point. As you say the documents etc are stored by the National Archives who have sold the rights which are public property. I have no problems with commercial interest but I do have a problem with any government body making money out of public information, which the National Archive is. The decision to make the data closed may have been retrospective but that was the rationale of the prime ministers office to a petition to reduce the closed period. Clearly money does speak as by rights the data should not have been available until 2011 Thanks Jim Hill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Firebird Sent: Friday, 26 December 2008 9:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ENG-SHROP] Early release of census and public availability James Hill wrote: > I do have concerns about the ethics of such a site. A recent petition to > reduced the time census data was locked away was rejected. The rationale was > that the informants had been promised that it would be locked away for 100 > years. However, that does not seem to be a problem if there is money to be > made. I am also concerned that public records are sold in this way. Tax > payers have paid for the storage of this data over time so it should again > be free. There was no promise at the time the census was taken that it would be closed for 100 years. The decision to make it so was made by the government retrospectively in 1960. Thus certain individuals were able to use the UK's Freedom of Information Act to get the census released early. It had nothing to do with money at all. It was action by individuals who have absolutely no connection with the government, or any commercial interests, who were responsible. The census is free of charge if you go to the National Archives, but you won't be able to handle the original documents. You'll only be able to see them on film (or on a PC now). In order to make the census (or any other documents) freely available, the documents have to be filmed (or digitised) which costs money. In the case of the census it consists of household schedules which have not been available for previous censuses. So, instead of having a number of households on a page, each household has a page to itself. The original documents took up one and a quarter *miles* of shelf space. To walk from one end to the other would take approx 35 mins at a normal pace. Therefore, in order to relieve the burden on taxpayers (many of whom aren't interested in family history) and to cover the cost of the filming/digitisation, the National Archives sells a license to specific companies who will, obviously, endeavour to recoup as much of their costs as possible, if only to allow them to make further documents available. The first census that was covered by government legislation to be closed for 100 years was the 1921. However, I have heard rumblings that attempts will be made to get that legislation overturned. The next document that could be released before its anticipated date is the 1939 National Registration which was not a census so therefore not covered by the 100 year closure applicable to censuses. There is a closure period on it but it may be possible for that to be released early. The 1931 census no longer exists and there was no census taken in 1941 thus making the 1951 census the next available one. We should respect the rights to privacy of all, especially those who are not nosey genealogists and family historians :)) The information is, in any case, available from other sources which are already open to the public. I hope this explains the situation. REMEMBER - The question you are asking may have already been answered. Threaded Archives at - http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS/Archives Searchable Archives at - http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message