Gggrrrrrr!! Private Tree on Ancestry photos copied

[Graham47]

Once you have posted anything up it's pretty much 'public property', even if you say it's not. Also, once you have posted them to ancestry.com removing them will make little difference as they are already out there in the public domain.

If you do not want people to copy them, then never ever post them up to web site such as ancestry.com or indeed any of the others. Tough I know but that's how it is.

Personally if I come across a photograph that is not mine be it a family photograph or any other image I will always but always try and get permission and when granted (as it nearly always is) I attached credit and thanks the owner before putting it into my own family tree or on my blog. Some time back I 'borrowed' a copy of a wood cut image of old town Croydon I had taken from an art galleries web site only to be contacted by the owner of the original who was then kind enough to accept my apology and allowed me to use it. Lesson learnt! 

This all reminds me a bit of lending a spanner to a mate who then lends it to somebody else and that's it, I never see it again so yes, Gggrrrr indeed!

[stonechat]

I can't understand why people complain

Once you have shared your tree with one person, they can copy your photos etc, and add them to their own tree, which my be oublic, or shared with others who have public trees

Personally I have benefitted from the sharing

[Graham47]

Have to agree there, it's often a good trade off with pictures and the like, but pinching personal text without asking really is out of order. I had some wonderful stuff from my great Aunts diary sent to me from the States which has been incorporated into my own personal and public blog, but with credit and thanks attached as said.

Ah well 

[mike175]

It is as well to remember that everything published on the Internet becomes public property by default, whatever you or the Law may say about it . . . including every post on this and other forums, unless they are 'members only' and password protected.

And the likes of G**gle can and will read your private correspondence as well 

[msr]

I can't understand why people complain

Once you have shared your tree with one person, they can copy your photos etc, and add them to their own tree, which my be oublic, or shared with others who have public trees

Personally I have benefitted from the sharing

Stonechat, I think the problem for most is that they have not shared their trees or anything added to them.   
The quarrel and associated upset/anger is with those other members who have TAKEN, without regard to anyone's feeling.

Surely a little courtesy, and prior contact, would not be too much to ask.
But then, with certain people it appears it is.

[stonechat]

But these people have shared something with at least one person
The information will not be out there otherwise

Once you share even once you have lost control

[iluleah]

But these people have shared something with at least one person
The information will not be out there otherwise

Once you share even once you have lost control

That is true, but even if you don't share with another person once you put anything online on any website that information belongs to the website so 'nothing' you put on there is 'yours'

I completely understand peoples frustration which is why I would never publish a tree private or not on any website and once done you can not delete it

[bugle boy]

just post on the net,and other web sites, what you dont mind sharing with others,any stories ,pics that you dont want to share  "Dont" post, we all know that anything that goes on the net becomes public.

[halhawk]

Like clayton bradley, I exchanged emails with someone to clarify some points in their tree, and subsequently found the content of my email on their tree, unattributed.  I can't say it bothered me for long, but I was a bit miffed that it was added as if their own research.  (And I would have written it a bit more formally if I had known)

halhawk