BMD'S FROM SP.....

[neleh_22]

I have a lot of extra BMD'S I have downloaded from SP. I wondered what everybody else does with theirs.

Helen

[Tusker]

I have a lot of extra BMD'S I have downloaded from SP. I wondered what everybody else does with theirs.

Helen

Helen -- You could post them on the Free BDM Exchange, and see if someone "adopts" them.

Tusker

[DavidWW]

I have a lot of extra BMD'S I have downloaded from SP. I wondered what everybody else does with theirs.

Helen

Helen

Just be aware that you are perfectly entitled to post transcripts on "exchange" sites mentioned above, but posting the actual images is breach of GROS/The Stationery Office copyright.

Put simply, while the information is in the public domain, the image files from SP are copyright.

David

[neleh_22]

Thanks Tusker and David,

Another question If I put the information on the Free BMD site am I allowed to send the images if someone asks for them by post or e-mail or can I only give them the information thats on the certificates.

Helen

[DavidWW]

Thanks Tusker and David,

Another question If I put the information on the Free BMD site am I allowed to send the images if someone asks for them by post or e-mail or can I only give them the information thats on the certificates.

Helen

Helen

Strictly speaking, the information only, but what you do on a one-to-one basis, and are happy with, is up to you.

A question that no-one's raised yet is what's the situation when a group of descendants are co-operating in research on their tree, and exchange images or scans of extracts ??.......... Make your own deductions in terms of the strict interpretation of the situation!

The reality is, I'd tend to believe, that the authorities involved will take a relaxed view of such a situation as long as any such exchange is reasonable and not conducted in public (I've seen such threads on DGs that will remain nameless), - but please don't ask me to define "reasonable"

What is likely to attract the attention of the authorities is very public offers on DGs of supplying copyright images from a list of several hundred register entries, - and I've seen such offers!

There is a body of opinion in the genealogical research world that just because the information itself is public domain, then any expression of the information such as SP images, scans or photocopies of GROS extracts, or GRO/GRONI certificates, never mind census enumeration book images, should also be public domain. As copyright law in the UK (and elsewhere) stands, that's not a correct interpretation.

It all comes down to what is "reasonable".

David

[Tusker]

Re: Copyright

I'm not a copyright lawyer, but I suppose a similar comparison would involve my purchase of a book.....My understanding is that if I buy a book and finish reading it, a very strict interpretation of the copyright law would forbid me from then giving it to someone else, as they had not paid the author/publisher/salespeople to read the book.

Taking it a step further, if I applied the same very strict interpretation, I couldn't lend it out to a number of friends and relatives, or donate it to a library or hospital waiting room, as they hadn't paid for the privilege of reading the book either.

However, I *could* tell everyone all about the book, so long as I don't read entire chapters or lengthy passages from it to them, or copy it onto a CD, or transcribe it word-for-word onto sheets of paper, for example.

I might also wish to interpret the law of the land in the same very strict manner. In other words, when driving a car, I should have both hands placed on the steering wheel at ALL times, as very strictly speaking, any failure to do so could result in my being charged with failing to have care and control of the vehicle, or possibly even be charged with reckless driving. The same very strict interpretation of the law could also cause me to be charged with physical assault if I tapped someone politely on the shoulder to ask directions.

Personally, regarding BMD's, I'd be quite comfortable with providing the details of the BMD on a public website, as it's knowledge I've acquired and paid for and to me, is the equivalent of telling people about the book, without actually giving them the book.

VERY STRICTLY speaking, I should not then e-mail them an image file or a hard copy of the certificate, as they should purchase this for themselves -- because once it's left my hands I don't know if THEY intend to post an image on a public website or make thousands of photocopies.

Somewhere on this website is the advice that we should all exercise good Scots commonsense. I think the same credo applies here.....

[DavidWW]

Hi Tusker

I cannot but agree with what you write.

The particular situation here, however, is in the context of the importance to TalkingScot DG of our link to GROS. Need I say more ?!

As suggested guid Scots commonsense does indeed apply, but there are also realities that need to be taken into account in terms of the law of the land, and the actions that might be taken by GROS/The Stationery Office, were exchange offers such as have been made on other DGs be repeated on TS. In terms of the latter I am led to believe that formal, legal contacts have been made.

David

PS If you buy a book, you're perfectly entitled to pass it on to whomsoever you wish !!

[Tusker]

Hi Tusker

I cannot but agree with what you write.

The particular situation here, however, is in the context of the importance to TalkingScot DG of our link to GROS. Need I say more ?!

Hi, David -- No, I understand. Point taken. My opinion was given to clarify the issue further, and as you agree with what I've written I think I can take that as a "Yes, but don't...."

As suggested guid Scots commonsense does indeed apply, but there are also realities that need to be taken into account in terms of the law of the land, and the actions that might be taken by GROS/The Stationery Office, were exchange offers such as have been made on other DGs be repeated on TS. In terms of the latter I am led to believe that formal, legal contacts have been made.

Of course. I certainly wouldn't agree with posting any open offers on TS. God forbid! We're the "good guys"

PS If you buy a book, you're perfectly entitled to pass it on to whomsoever you wish !!

OK. Well, when the Book Police come for me, I'll just blame it all on you then!

[paddyscar]

Opinions have been flung about on this issue since Xerox was a baby! After 35 years in library work, it sometimes feels like we are no closer to settling this. Rapidly changing technology only increases problems in safeguarding copyrights.

So I'll jump in the same boat as DavidWW and Tusker. It's not the sharing of the facts, but the sharing of the image owned by SP that is illegal.

Copyright laws, like patents, protect the creator's right to profit financially from their creation or invention.

The fee that you pay to SP for an image, is ONLY for the image for your own use, not the right to distribute the image.

Giving the document you paid for, to someone else when it turns out to be the wrong 'John Smith' is an example of DavidWW's term 'reasonable use'.

ScotlandsPeople allows us to post images to this site ONLY to get assistance in reading them, and the TS Administrators and Moderators are very vigilant on that point. This concession from ScotlandsPeople is very generous.

Very good guidelines have been given ...

... It all comes down to what is "reasonable"...

... we should all exercise good Scots commonsense.

Frances

[DavidWW]

.....snipped .............
ScotlandsPeople allows us to post images to this site ONLY to get assistance in reading them, and the TS Administrators and Moderators are very vigilant on that point. This concession from ScotlandsPeople is very generous. ...... snipped Frances

Hi Frances

Many thanks for that contribution based on 35 years of experience as a professional librarian !

This is an area that has deeply interested and engaged me for a couple of decades or more, and which I've discussed at length with experts in the area, plus GROS, never mind experts at the Salt Lake City library of the Genealogical Society of Utah, and others, in a particular genealogical context.

Posts that I make on this subject are not, as has been suggested, like "pulling rabbits out of hats", but are based on such extensive contacts and discussion with copyright law experts per se, as well as genealogical stakeholders ranging from individuals such as Des Garrity in Scotland, Ian Galbraith of ScotsOrigins, FHSs, government departments and agencies including the "ultimate" in terms of The Stationery Office who are the UK copyright holder for GROS and other similar material, and a long, long list of other stakeholders.

Maybe when I make a post in a relevant thread I should repeat all this, along with times, dates, names and places, but I can only comment that there aren't enough hours in the day. If I don't make it clear that I'm expressing a personal opinion then I'd like to believe that it's patently obvious that I wouldn't state something as fact unless that was indeed the case, ..... when I express a personal opinion, I make it clear that it's such.

Coming back to this particular case GROS know and understand full well that many posts on TS lead to an initial, immediate loss of income to GROS, but they fully understand that such "loss" is initial only, and will very much more often than not be vastly counter balanced by much more income that wouldn't otherwise have resulted.

In a similar vein, take any personal or FHS CD, - they are all fully aware that the loss of income to them via the reasonable use of such CDs in answering posts on TS is more than balanced by the advertising effect and resultant increase in sales for them, which wouldn't have happened otherwise.

There will always be a irreducible small number of posters who take undue advantage of such a situation, but that's just life They soon become known !!

Now just where did I file that 1,000 word definition in the context of "reasonable" ..... k

David