"J. Hugh Sullivan" <Eagle@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:4932c7de.12070656@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 17:59:08 +0100, "Kurt"
<kurt.fredriksson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"J. Hugh Sullivan" <Eagle@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >news:4932a756.3741765@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:04:27 +0000, Ian Goddard
> >> <goddai01@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Bhoggatt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 29, 6:22 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >>> In message of 29 Nov, Bhogg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Mr. Alciere:
> >> >>>> Please explain your method of taking copyrighted information
> >without
> >> >>>> permission from other websites.
> >> >>> I am reasonably sure that in most countries data is not
> >copywrightable,
> >> >>> only the method of presentation is.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> In any case the must more serious problem with this sort of
data
> >is its
> >> >>> veracity: what information is given about the reproducible
> >sources of
> >> >>> the data? The average website has no such information, so is
> >worthless.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Tim Powys-Lybbe
> >t...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >>> For a miscellany of bygones:http://powys.org/
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I beg to differ. The presentation on the web is the
coyrightable
> >> >> component. Scraping web sites and not producing it from your
own
> >> >> sources is a violation and often times the reason that many
> >> >> researchers stop providing information.
> >> >
> >> >For one thing the OP wasn't about scraping websites, it was
about
> >> >uploading of original transcripts.
> >> >
> >> >And for another, anyone who wants to publish but not have what
he
> >> >published used by others needs to ask himself why he published
in
> >the
> >> >first place. For goodness' sake - SHARE information, don't
hoard
> >it!!!!
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Ian
> >>
> >> People need to be educated about sourcing when they use shared
data.
> >A
> >> source is where a person got the data, not where someone else got
> >the
> >> data (except as a secondary source).
> >>
> >> Too many times we find that data we researched over a long period
of
> >> time is scavenged by others who show themselves as the source.
> >>
> >> Hugh
> >
> >So what?
> >
> >I have published my research together with sources. Iīm doing it
for
> >my own pleasure and donīt mind if other researchers are copying the
> >information. Please observe that I said "the information" not MY
> >information.
> >As Ian said: "For goodness' sake - SHARE information, don't hoard
> >it!!!!"
> >
> >Kurt F
>
> What you show, unless you copied everything, is "your information" -
> you researched, collected and displayed it.
>
> You appear to be saying that you don't care about accuracy in
> sourcing. Did I miss something?
>
> Hugh
>
You certainly did.
I have primary sources for 94% for the births, 88% for the marriages
and 93% for the deaths. These figures are from May this year. Since
then I have added even more sources.
These sources were written a couple of days after the event.
As all sources are public, I canīt claim owner****p to the information
itself. And I donīt do that. If you can find something useful on my
web-pages, feel free to use it. I would be delighted if I could help a
fellow genealogist in his/her research.
As Ian said: "For goodness' sake - SHARE information, don't hoard
it!!!!"
Kurt F
|
