I just wanted to step in (for what may be my only venture into this discussion) and respond to some of Joe B's comments and ideas, as well as bring up some of my own. Rootsweb's initial mission was exactly the same as the USGenWeb project- to keep internet genealogy free (and legal). This was prior to their being bought out in 2000, so obviously the rules have changed (and I'm sure MyFamily changed a lot of the wording once they got a hold of things). MyFamily.com has become a sort of a "Ma Bell" of the online genealogy community, and so it does warrant a close look at things to see if it might be time for us to cut our ties. If I'm not mistaken, all or nearly all of the county/state sites were up and active *before* the sellout/buyout of Rootsweb in 2000. Since they have been passed down from coordinator to coordinator, it has just been easier to refresh and maintain existing sites rather than remove them entirely and set them up on other hosting services. But there are some who have done this, so it's not impossible- but for the rest of us it would be a large undertaking on a grand scale. If we did this, would it be best to do it in phases? What problems might we encounter? Should we all jump ship to one single provider (like Google), or might it be better to scale down and offer a handful of possible providers (preferably non-genealogy related)? Would there be any chance of the same things occurring over again as far as user-submitted data and it being exploited for someone else's monetary gain? Wasn't there a similar issue with user-submitted family tree data and Ancestry initially charging for that (and then changing their policies to make it into a free-access family tree database)? Since the GenWeb project is, after all, essentially 100% user-submitted data (and design), do they have a right to create any kind of free access/search engine results to provide access to that data for anyone using their site? They probably do, and if that bothers us, we need to do something about it. If Rootsweb wants their logo on USGenWeb pages, it makes perfect sense that Ancestry will follow too (notice the Ancestry logo side-by-side with the Rootsweb logo at the top of Rootsweb pages already). Do we want to open ourselves up to that possibility? I'm not a big fan of that idea. Is Rootsweb expecting every free page they host (non-USGenWeb related) to incorporate their logo in a masthead? Probably not. Why? Maybe because *we* are such a huge force in online genealogy (at least I believe we are) that they want a piece of us. Something that should be looked at is Rootsweb's "Acceptable Use Policy" which can be found here: http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/aup.html Here are some choice segments from the Ters and Conditions that made me raise my eyebrows- wondering if it is really "safe" to continue with their service: "...Your use of the Service indicates that you are bound by this agreement with us. If you don't agree with any of these terms and conditions, don't use the Service. We may alter this agreement at our discretion and your continued use after any change indicates your acceptance of that change. If you don't want to be bound by a change, discontinue use of the Service. ...Limited Use LICENSE You are licensed to use the Content only for personal or professional family history research, and may download Content only as search results relevant to that research. The download of the whole or significant portions of any work or database is prohibited. Resale of a work or database or portion thereof, except as specific results relevant to specific research for an individual, is prohibited. On line or other republication of Content is prohibited except as unique data elements that are part of a unique family history or genealogy. Violation of this License may result in immediate termination of your membership and may result in legal action for injunction, damages or both. ... [Are they bound by this agreement as well??] ...User-Provided Content Portions of the Service will contain user-provided content, to which you may contribute appropriate content (the "Submitted Content") For this Content, the submitter is the owner, and RootsWeb.com is only a distributor. By submitting Submitted Content to RootsWeb.com, you grant MyFamily.com, Inc., the corporate host of the Service, a limited license to the Submitted Content to use, host, and distribute that Submitted Content and allow hosting and distribution on co-branded Services of that Submitted Content. You should submit only content which belongs to you and will not violate the property or other rights of other people or organizations. MyFamily.com, Inc. is sensitive to copyright and other intellectual property rights of others. For more information concerning copyright issues, view our corporate policy. Content submitted for the purpose of commercial use, advertising or fee for service is prohibited. ... ...Because some states/jurisdictions do not allow the exclusion or limitation of liability for consequential or incidental damages, this limitation may not apply in part to you. IF YOU ARE DISSATISFIED WITH ANY PORTION OF THIS WEB SERVICE, OR WITH ANY OF THESE TERMS OF USE, YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY IS TO DISCONTINUE USING THIS WEB SERVICE...." I did not alter any of that- just copied and pasted it here. The note in brackets is mine. I currently have my own Google Pages that I use for family genealogy, and have been using Google's Page Creator to put it together. I don't know how that page creator will work for others- so just uploading the pages as-is might be best. But I would have a concern about how to establish all of the county/state/archives pages we would need to have without working out an arrangement with Google. If the usernames and passwords will be passed down to future coordinators, then a specific agreement might need to be worked out in order to do that. I think that might cut into a "misrepresentation/impersonation" conflict if the registration info no longer applies to a new coordinator (how could we create pages not tied to a person's name in any way?). I apologize for the length of this, but wanted to sort out my thoughts and see what others felt about all this. This is a potentially huge shift for the Projects, but maybe it will turn out to be a worthwhile undertaking. I come at this from the perspective of a long-time USGenWeb user as well as an Ancestry.com subscriber. USGenWeb is more personal than Ancestry and will only increase in value as time goes on (especially as the Census Project continues). I dream of the day when I won't need to subscribe to Ancestry.com, because all of the info they charge for will finally end up on the web for free (at USGenWeb and at other archival sources -like Universities- who don't/can't charge for their data). As we grow stronger, Ancestry might grow weaker, because if they can't legally monopolize documents and data then it is only a matter of time before someone else (like a volunteer) gets to it and provides access to the information for free. Thank you for your time on this, and for everyone coming out to voice their concerns and ideas. Belinda Slocumb Stewart and Webster CC, GAGenWeb

A couple more cents' worth about this up and coming move. Sorry if you are tired of messages, but it seems like there are lots of ideas out there. Perhaps this is an issue that cannot, and maybe should not, be handled by e-mail. A move in which "historical" ties are cut between organizations (I put "historical" in quotes because what is ancient web history is in fact just a few years in real time) takes a lot of concerted effort on the parts of many people. It seems to me that there needs to be some sort of conference or summit on this, maybe on different levels of the USGenWeb organization. Perhaps it needs to be incorporated and funded via donation, as with many NPOs. This would allow the organization to move in its own way and afford it greater legal standing viz-a-viz other providers, such as the "Ma Bell," myfamily.com. Perhaps the officers at various levels should have more real power. If there is some sort of central endowment/donation system that is free from commercialism, the organization can work more independantly, with a sort of board of directors, annual meetings, etc. Perhaps donations in the form of advertising could be acceptible, as "sponsors" could be assigned various levels of support. This would not entitle them to ads but possibly to a "hall of fame" kind of status with various levels of support. Then, those organizations that support the site could display USGenWeb support emblems on their sites, giving them prestige that we generate. There could also be far more quality control, and more control of what goes on websites at all levels of the organization in terms of what is legal and approriate or not. Sorry my mind is just sort of in brainstorm mode here but I have seen these kinds of things in other NPOs that seem to be successful. Were the USGenWeb an NPO, a seperate, incorporated not-for-profit body, perhaps the organization could be stronger, with a highly-functional set of national, state, and project coordinators working within an organized framework. Perhaps at a yearly national conference officers could be elected for the national level at large, and there could be caucuses for state coordinator elections. The volunteers would act as shareholders, each with a vote. The beauty of such a system is that the site could, potentially, should all go well, become a self-determining, non-absorbable entity on the web that could, for many years to come, remain a clearing house and centrally-located, powerful tool for genealogists of all levels of experience to work with. I am not a businessman, but I think an NPO with a business type model would be a good way for the whole organization to go. Feel free to disagree with me, and poke holes all through this rant/brainstorm. Confusion and unsurity, I say, can be a powerful catalyst for change rather than an embrace of a less-than-desirable status quo. Mike Fisher Grady County CC