I filed a complaint with the Illinois State Attorney General, and the President of Genealogy.com responded. Interestingly, he made no mention of the fine print permission granting-it may be that they have now added that caveat because of my complaint. When I signed up for the service several years ago, there was no mention of my agreeing to the keep of the number on file until after the last window of acceptance appeared, and then it was too late to stop the transaction. My complaint caused enough problems for the company that they were forced to respond to the Attorney General's investigator, but I am afraid my voice was lost in the wilderness-most people my age can't remember what they had to eat this morning, let alone whether they gave permission.... And I agree with the person who complained about the constant bombardment of sales gimmicks by ancestry.com. 14 days of free access to 1930 Census--didn't I just pay them money for access to the Census' ?? Why is 1930 excluded? And again-these people know they are dealing with older people. They know that someone who bites for this sales gimmick is not going to remember to terminate it a few days later if it isn't useful. It isn't unlawful, but it certainly tramples on the spirit of the original Rootsweb philosophy. Remember when Rootsweb merged and said it was still going to be free? That nothing was going to change, unless it was for the better? David Jones