The copyright law was changed in 1989 - you migh do an Internet search on the subject. Basically -- as I understand it -- copyrights protect creativity, not factual information. I am no attorney but this had been conveyed to me on a few different occasions. Since 1989, oner need NOT put a copyright(c) logo oon their work in order to consider it their property .... but check those details on the 1989m law. Steven Wallace In a message dated 97-07-21 00:10:25 EDT, WALLACE-L@rootsweb.com writes: << In a message dated 97-07-20 14:39:31 EDT, you write: << It is NOT the same. If you print a copy of the Bible pages in the newspaper, and I buy the paper the information is now MINE. I did not go into your home and take it. You uploaded a file and made it available to everyone. >> But, if you buy a copy of that paper then the article will have a byline giving credit to the person who did the research and the writing. Also that paper had permission to reprint the author's work. If this was not true then the newspaper would be in large amounts of trouble. Trust me, I work at one. <<Copyright law is very specific. You can not copyright facts. Period! You can not copyright public documents. Period! >> But you can copyright work. If I transcribe a Bible or will or census record, or spend three hours walking through a cemetery, and go to the trouble of publishing it -- in any media -- it can be copyrighted. Anyone is allowed to go behind me and re-research and republish, but they may not copy verbatim from my production. Ya'll have missed the point. The point is not that Matt shared our info. The point is that he did it without prior consent and HE CLAIMED IT AS HIS OWN. If this man had written me and asked permission, stating that he would include credit and a link back to my pages, he would not only have had my blessings, but would have gotten a link to his archive on all of my pages as well. But he didn't, therefore he was wrong. And wrong is wrong. Besides Matt's page is not shutdown. He merely took off the info which he took w/o permission and is starting over the correct way. I'm sure it will come back up and be most informative. I for one intend on giving him some info, but it will be with the understanding that the author/researcher (myself or another) gets credit. I have published many things, fiction and non-, newspapers, magazine articles, for free and for pay, photographs, and even now am helping in a full length movie made from one of my father's novels. There is a right and a wrong way to do reprints. I believe that Matt now knows the difference. -- Harvey Greene >>