Exactly one week ago I published a blog post about a
newspaper article I found via GenealogyBank.com. You can see this blog post HERE. It was a very popular blog piece seen by over
a thousand viewers, and I had comments from friends, readers and seasoned
bloggers on Facebook about this article.
However, only one person, a new blogger, noticed something important
about this blog post.
She wrote to me via email that as a new blogger she was very
interested in “how you were able to post a newspaper article from Genealogy
Bank. I thought that they owned the
copyright. Did you have to contact
Genealogy Bank for permission?” These
are all wonderful questions, and I used to think about this a lot as a new
blogger, too.
However, as a seasoned genealogy blogger I forgot that
certain online services, like Ancestry, make it easy to share images. Ancestry has share buttons that allow you to
email, blog, use Pinterest, and other social media. I knew that this was the case because I had researched and blogged about it HERE.
Genealogy Bank doesn’t have those share buttons or easy
access to sharing images. I had signed
up for Genealogy Bank years and years ago, and I had forgotten that they
carefully control their images and even transcriptions of their newspaper
images. As soon as I received that email
from the new blogger, I went to my favorite resource for checking
copyright. Not Google. It was Judy Russell’s blog The Legal
Genealogist, where I found this post “Terms of use: GenealogyBank” HERE at this link http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2012/08/23/terms-of-use-genealogybank/
This is a gentle reminder to frequently review the terms of
use of the resources you use online.
And, to remember, if there is not an easy “share button”,
you probably shouldn’t be sharing!
So, I’m removing the image from HERE, and also removing most
of the transcribed text. Short excerpts
are OK.
I’d love to hear from other bloggers and blog readers about
this. What are your thoughts?
The image above is "Senate Patents & Copyright Committee, 4/9/24", Library of Congress (National Photo Company Collection), call number LC-F81-29769, from the website http://www.loc.gov/item/npc2008006075/ accessed August 23, 2015.
UPDATE - See in the comments below that Emily Moore has posted a link to another one of Judy Russell's posts that has updated information on GenealogyBank permissions on images http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2013/07/26/genealogybank-permissions-clarified/
UPDATE - See in the comments below that Emily Moore has posted a link to another one of Judy Russell's posts that has updated information on GenealogyBank permissions on images http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2013/07/26/genealogybank-permissions-clarified/
------------------------------------
Genealogy Bank changed its Terms of Use slightly, and now gives instructions on how to ask permission to use something from their site. http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2013/07/26/genealogybank-permissions-clarified/
ReplyDeleteGood to know, Emily! Thanks for adding this comment!
DeleteThey take much time to make all available to us and it's such a credit to them for us to share and advertise their site. It seems like as long as they are credited, it should be ok. Hopefully they are following suit like Ancestry. If we don't share info, the history becomes lost and the blogś truly keep it going.
ReplyDeletei wasn't able to decode the legalese on Newspapers.com so I sent them an email asking if I could use an image (clipping) on my blog. At first they seemed a little leery and asked lots of questions about my intentions. I replied with a link to my blog and received permission to use what I wanted. It was a fast turnaround once I sent the link to my blog. I will send the link in the initial request in the future. I think they were making sure I was legit and not going to just copy copious amounts of content and repost it. They saw it would give the good publicity from sharing a few cool things.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment about Newspapers.com, Pam. I once got permission from a museum to post a document on my blog, but only after they looked at my blog and saw that it was non-profit and family based. It was a similar situation. I'm going to try contacting Genealogybank, so stay tuned! Maybe that image will be back up on my blog!
DeleteWhile I applaud your concern for copyright, Heather, which is a concern I share, I don't understand why any online service that you have to pay for can copyright LOC materials-which are public. I would access the same image at the Library of Congress and credit their collection.
ReplyDeleteHere is the original image at the Library of Congress: http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/npc2008006075/. No restrictions. Services like Genealogybank and Newspapers.com make money just because researchers don't go to the source!
ReplyDeleteDonna, the image in question is the newspaper article image from GenealogyBank, ( Boston Herald (Boston, Massachusetts), Saturday, November 16, 1940, "Many Public Bequests Made in Will of Salem Woman", page 15). I originally posted this newsclipping, but have since removed the image. The photo of the Senate Patents and Copyright committe was from the Library of Congress website, and has the correct attribution at the bottom of the blog post.
DeleteOh, sorry, Heather--still drinking my morning coffee! Still wondering about a newspaper clipping however--not available at any of the free digitized newspaper sites? The credit should go to the Boston Herald, not some service that reproduces their content.
ReplyDeleteHeather,
ReplyDeleteI'd like to let you know that your blog post is listed in my Fab Finds post at http://janasgenealogyandfamilyhistory.blogspot.com/2015/08/follow-friday-fab-finds-for-august-28.html
Have a great weekend!
Thanks, Jana!
DeleteCopyright is such a complex subject, both sides of the Atlantic and I am very wary of what I use from the web. . I am amazed at a blog I regularly read, where there is never any reference or acknowledgment to the source of the images which are obviously taken from magazines, museum websites etc. Thank you for raising this issue, as it is one we should all be aware of.
ReplyDeleteFamily History Fun