Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2012-04 > 1335719409

From: <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] More on copyright
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:10:09 -0500
References: <002101cd2558$5e8ef7b0$1bace710$> <023001cd25eb$4e7bc950$eb735bf0$> <000e01cd25f7$8a136890$9e3a39b0$> <024301cd25fb$1f0235f0$5d06a1d0$><001e01cd25fd$13c4a360$3b4dea20$>
In-Reply-To: <001e01cd25fd$13c4a360$3b4dea20$>

Regarding a provider's right to set the terms for access and use, there is
another major consideration I have not seen mentioned.

An image at Provider A's website is not necessarily the same as what
Provider B offers and both may be better or worse than the image we would
see if we went to the archive that held the original.

Our various providers enhance their images in different ways--or they don't.
They make those available through delivery systems that vary widely in speed
and functionality. Those factors are considerations in the access terms, the
fees charged, and the original question as to what their copyright can

The difference between a provider's image and the information I would have
gotten had I gone to the original was made clear--very graphically--in the
May-June 2009 issue of the now-defunct _Ancestry_ Magazine (pp. 34-35), in a
short article titled "It's What You Don't See." The enhancements made by
Ancestry's engineer Jack Reese to the Manchester 1851 census are nothing
short of astounding.

For those of you who didn't subscribe, there's an online version of the
article at


Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG

This thread: