Genealogy Chat

Margaret, you said on p1 that the website was updated on 1.12.07. If it is an American website that would be the 12th Jan, not the 1st of December. They always put it back to front, I think. (Not like 'normal' people).

Whats the betting that will get a few indignant comments from the 'Yanks'?

Some of my best friends live in Yankeeland, so I am not too serious. (Hoping to appease them).

Still no reply!

The web site in question is British. Originating, I believe, in Scotland.

It's not a large organisation like Ancestry etc., more a 'privately owned' site - which makes it more difficult - if the owner chooses to ignore my requests there's not a lot I can do.

I've not given up yet, though!

M. Steer

(Taking out repeated overlong message)

(Ditto)

(Ditto)

Hi Margaret

Perhaps try sending them this booklet, produced by the ICO.

Its about how an organisation should decide what data should be made public,
and what should be kept confidential.

www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/
practical_application/sharing_personal_information_v1.1.pdf

The ICO has regional offices for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, so it
should be applying the Data Protection Act there as well.

All the best

Sorry - website address was too long, tried to amend it and have ended up posting several times over. I can't get at the edit/delete/add on page 2 now to remove the posts. Any ideas, anyone, or do we have to live with my error?

(Now corrected - with help from GR, I think)

Thanks for that address Ivy - very informative.

M. Steer

Ivy,

I would report this to the Data Protection Act office.

I recently was given access to a Genes Reunited member's tree with details of her little kiddies, not just their names and ages, but also their current home address, their nicknames, and their favourite toys.

I emailed her at once to advise her to remove all this, but she hasn't responded. Genes to be fair did ask me to identify the person and said they would conact her, but by then I had gone on so far I couldn't remember who she was.

Such information could be very powerful in the hands of someone unscrupulous. I don't want to frighten anyone, but if you know a kiddy's home address, nickname and favourite cuddly toy it does mean you could get the confidence of that child very easily.

I suggested to Genes that when person uploads a tree with people aged less than a certain age and still alive (maybe all people, but certainly kiddies), they flash up a warning to ask the member to amend the name. They didn't respond to that suggestionl

Margaret

Hi Margaret

I agree, it worries me whenever I see details of children on trees.

I see that Ancestry's T&C's refer to some semi-automatic process that attempts to ensure that living people are not posted, but it seems to be worded almost to say - but don't rely on this.

It might actually be reasonably easy to add something as you suggest to the software on here. The programme extracts data from trees and organises it by date of birth as well as identifying hot matches and emailing members, so it might be possible to review tree updates, find dates of birth after 1900 and email the member to remind them that they need informed consent to post details of that individual, if still living. I think I have seen somewhere that anyone under the age of 18 cannot give informed consent. There is a box to tick which suppresses the availability of data on people born after 1900 - presumably it would be a good idea if this could operate automatically on anyone born after 1989, followed by an email to the member to explain why they cannot have obtained consent to posting such data, and to require that they remove it.

I'll try emailing the GR office.

There are a number of references to the Data Protection Act in this thread. Unfortunately, it is very unlikely that the DPA would apply as Genealogical Research is generally exempt.

The exception to this exemption is where an individual has suffered substantial distress as a result of their own details being recorded. However, there is no definition of 'substantial' so presumably it would be a matter for the courts.

The other issue is that it is not the website owner who is the custodian of tree data, but rather the person who posted it there. Therefore any action would need to be taken by each and every aggrieved individual against the poster, which is likely to prove difficult.

If you are not happy with information being made public then don't share it. If you do share, then you have little comeback.

This is really weird!

I've still not received a reply BUT I've just gone onto the web site and my name and my husband's have gone. Also my Sister & husband, children (and spouses) and Grandchildren.

I'm SO glad but I find it very odd - I never mentioned any names in my e-mails.

Ever get the feeling you're being watched?!....

M. Steer

I'm probably being a little naive here but can someone tell me why not to put living rellies on my tree. After all, aren't they just meaningless names to other people, can they do anything with the names .

Hi Margaret,

I'm glad the names have been removed - perhaps by the relation who posted them rather than by the website owner?

Hi Linda,

It is not so much that anyone would start with a random name picked from this site - more that if someone wanted to build a picture of a particular individual, then this site is one place where they could find a lot of info very quickly, depending on what had been posted. If you have added living relatives' names, did you get their consent (see the terms and conditions), are they adults, and did you add any additional info (dates, photos, jobs, favourite toy(!), etc)?

Hi Peter
You said "If you are not happy with information being made public then don't share it. If you do share, then you have little comeback"

I agree - what Margaret is cross about is the lack of comeback where someone else has posted info. How would you feel if Joe Bloggs your second cousin included you in their tree, added your postcode, tel no, job, some half-truths about a rumour that circulated around the family a few years ago and then posted the info to several websites? You might struggle to identify the individual responsible, and it would be useful to know that you could approach the website owner about the availability of your personal details. I'm not sure that the law is particularly helpful at present.

It's a very sticky subject. My mum was approached by a distant relative and she chatted to him - then I found someone on here (not the distant relation) had her on their tree and in the notes had where she lives, her date of divorce from my dad and her date of remarriage!!
This is information that is available to the public, but not too easy to find - you'd have to know date of divorce (which even I don't know!!) /remarriage to find it etc. (which my mum didn't disclose). Apart from being a bit creepy, all this information put together is an easy way to take someone's identity or rip off an elderly lady, and hardly of genealogical interest to anyone but her children/grandchildren etc.


maggie