What Is Going On With the SSDI?

If you’ve been following the news, reading the genealogy blogs or are just really on top of your game, you’ve heard at least a little of the kerfuffle surrounding the Social Security Administration’s Death Master File. If not, or you don't get what the big stink is about, lemme break it down for you. This is a very wordy, very link heavy post, but you NEED to know this stuff. Please take the time to read it, follow the links, and if I don't answer all your questions, head to Google right after!

What is the Social Security Administration?
The Social Security Act was passed to create a social program that would provide financial assistance to retirees, unemployed persons, and families with dependent children. The Social Security Administration was conceived in 1936 as a way to track workers’ earnings in order to compute the benefit level and entitlements that would be paid to said worker or their surviving dependents. At it’s inception, the SSA was only worried about non-agricultural employees, though that would change rapidly until almost every person in the United States was issued a Social Security Number. Most citizens now receive their SSN at the time they are born.

What is the Social Security Number?
The Social Security Number is a 9-digit number that is used to identify a specific worker and track their wage earnings. From inception to December 2008, the SSA has issued approximately 450 million Social Security Numbers. The social security number is broken up into three groups in the 000-00-0000 format. What’s with the format and why is it a useful tool for Genealogists? Well, the first three numbers are an area number. The second set is for a group number. The final set is a personally identifying serial number. Basically thousands can have the same area and group number, but that serial number is the one that tells people who you are specifically. No one has a 0000 serial number. Social Security Numbers can be found documented in many places from court documents to property records. While we’ve become more concerned with identity theft, there used to be a time that that number could be found on checks, driver’s licenses, school id’s, etc. As a genealogist, knowing that number can help you confirm that the John Smith you are talking about is your John Smith.

The area number was divided across the country and commonwealths to indicate the state that issued the number. It can’t be considered residence of the worker as many would work and live in different areas (or, as it was a new system, companies mistakenly had all their employees send their applications to a central location on the East Coast despite where the worker actually lived). Still, for the most part, an area number can often hold the clue as to where the person was when they applied for their number. In 1972, the area number was changed to indicate the ZIP code on the application itself. So at least the later applications may be more accurate as to the residence of the individual. As of June 2011, the SSA randomizes social security numbers. So going forward, the geographic information (which was only slightly accurate to begin with) will become a historical note and no longer applicable to actual numbers.

What’s so important about that area number for Genealogists? This is the coolest part of the whole number, folks. You see, the area number was assigned to the states EXCEPT for a handful of numbers that were reserved for specific purposes:

• 700-720 were reserved for railroad workers until July 1963.
• 586 was reserved for Samoa, Guam, the Philippines, Americans employed abroad by American employers and (from 1975-1979) Indochinese refugees.
• 580 was reserved for the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.
• 581-584, 596-599 were also reserved for Puerto Rico.
• 577-579 was reserved for Washington D.C.
• 587-588 went to Mississippi and 589-595 to Florida when their original area numbers were used up.
• 729-733 went to the Department of Homeland Security’s EaE (Enumeration at Entry) program.
• 000, 666, 900-999 are unassigned and finding any claim to these area numbers is a blatant sign of a false number.

So by looking at the area number, you can tell where they applied (and possibly resided). If you see 715 as the start of your great uncle’s number , you can tell he was a railroad worker at least when he filed for his number. Even if you know nothing else about your relative, you now know this. If your relative has a 586, and you know they were born and raised in the mainland, you can now figure that they may have worked overseas for a time (and that means they may have border crossing documents!).


What is the SS-5?
An SS-5 is the application one fills out to receive a social security card. The application includes the first and last name of the applicant, their birthday, residence, gender, race (sometimes), and parents’ names. You can request a copy of the SS-5 of any person under FOIA, though if they are living, you will most likely be declined unless you are their guardian or have special reason why this will not be an invasion of their privacy (you can request your own file, claims and all). The SSA will search for the application for a fee of $29 ($27 if you know the SSN). Now, a word of caution: there is a legislative act that blots out the parents’ names if you cannot submit reasonable proof of death for the applicant who is not at least 100 years in age (or the number holder is not at least 120 years in age when no proof of death is provided). You can get the names if you can prove that the parents are dead. All well and good until you consider that a genealogist is usually ordering this document to get that information. Now, the statute argues that this is acceptable under the FOIA (5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6)). The section states that information can be withheld if it is “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” I get that if it is a recent death and the parents could reasonably be considered to be alive. That’s why they chose to restrict it for any applicant who is under 100 years in age when dead or 120 if still alive (or not proven dead). On the other hand, that number seems awfully high. Or maybe I’m just mad that I can’t get the name my grandfather put down for his father until 2027.

What is the Death Master File?
When your death is reported to the Social Security Administration, they add your name and number to the Death Master File. The death can be voluntarily reported by relatives, funeral homes or states’ health departments. Because not every death is reported to the SSA, not finding someone on the Death Master File doesn’t mean they aren’t dead. With that said, it is still 90% accurate for deaths of persons 65 and over (especially if they receive benefits).The file is updated weekly. The version offered to the public through various companies is usually called the Social Security Death Index (and comes with the warning that it may not be up to date).

Looking at the public file isn’t free. For an individual record, the NTIS (National Technical Information Service) will charge you $10. For a company to provide the most up-to-date version can cost them thousands of dollars. For a U.S., Canada or Mexico based company, the one-time purchase quarterly file costs $1,825. If they want a full year subscription it’s $3,650 (and this doesn’t count weekly update options!). For any other country, the cost is $7,245-$14,490. So if I live in the U.K. and I’m wanting to use the information in the most up-to-date DMF for a statistical survey of mortality rates across the globe based on availability of state provided pension plans (let’s just pretend), I may pay $7,245 (or £4,514) to get the latest file listing all those who have died. Ancestry.com used to provide this information as a free service. Because of the recent scrutiny of genealogy sites and how identity thieves may be using them, Ancestry.com has placed the index behind their pay membership portal and removed any person who died within the last 10 years. Remember that I can still go straight to the source and pay $10 a lookup. Heck, there’s even an unlimited lookup option for $995 (that admittedly makes Ancestry‘s year fee look like peanuts, but still less than a grand to search for anyone listed on the DMF). And there are still some genealogy sites that aren’t taking any action until the laws concerning the DMF are changed.

Who uses it?
Primarily, the SSA uses Social Security Numbers to identify an individual, track their wages, determine their benefits level and eligibility and cut off benefits when that number is added to the DMF (or begin benefits for their survivors). Government entities also use it for tracking parents that owe child support, Medicare and VA benefits, military and federal employee identification, Native American programs, identifying legal aliens, issuing bonds, providing driver’s licenses and vehicle registrations, social programs like food stamps and school lunches, federal loans, HUD program, blood donations, jury selection, tracking alimony payments and cash transactions over $10k………. Oh yeah and verifying IRS tax returns so they don’t pay out dead people! The IRS is supposed to use the DMF to confirm that people aren’t claiming children they don’t have as dependents or filing claims for the deceased. I underlined “supposed to”, because at this moment the IRS is trying to say they don’t have the money or the manpower to stay on top of the fraud. That doing so would mean people would have to wait longer for their tax returns. I’ll get more into my opinion on this in the conclusion, but I want to be very clear right here: Banks, employers and the government are supposed to be using the DMF to STOP FRAUD AND IDENTITY THEFT.

Employers use the SSN via the CBSV (Consent Based Social Security Number Verification Service). The purpose of this system is to take the name and social security number you provide upon hiring to verify that they both match the records the SSA has. The system doesn’t provide any information about you, but will list a “Yes” if the name and number match, a “No” if they don’t, and a “Deceased” if you’re supposed to be dead. This is to confirm you actually get credit for the wages you turn over to the SSA as well as ensure that a person’s identity (whether they be dead or alive) isn’t being used fraudulently. Any financial institution that creates accounts and extends credit also uses the SSN to confirm that the person in front of them is who they say they are. Card companies should be checking the DMF to make sure dead people aren’t opening lines of credit.

Researchers studying epidemiological, mortality, retirement, disability, or even death reporting use these files. When using other death indexes like the NDI (National Death Index) that are created by death certificates, the DMF can be a control group. Any genealogist can tell you how misinformed the informant on a death certificate can be. Since the SSA gets the information from the actual person (or the parent at birth), the information is considered more accurate. The DMF also covers deaths prior to the start of the NDI in 1979. As it stands, the DMF is still the best for any researcher wanting a statistical analysis that will cover 1937-present. And hospitals and researchers will use the DMF to track study subjects (which is a good way to ensure a subject that doesn’t report in isn’t just forgetful). The NDI can be over a year behind in records, which can hamper the accuracy and timeliness of research.

And of course, us lowly genealogists…… including forensic genealogists who, as the lovely Legal Genealogist pointed out, are “the folks who need access to help in legal proceedings, in repatriation of the remains of American service members, and so much more.” Even if I’m willing to give up the last 2-10 years (for the sake of privacy of living relatives and whatnot), there are laws being proposed that will shut the whole thing down! Being one of the most comprehensive death files out there, especially for elderly relatives, this is a boon for a genealogist to find people within the last 80 years. We have so many privacy restrictions already that sometimes the only thing that will tell me if I even have a shot of finding a relative alive or not is if they show up on that index. Why take that away from people trying to connect with their relatives? Why stop adoptees from taking a known name and at least finding out if any possibility of a reunion has long passed. Why restrict siblings from finding each other after a family quarrel? Why keep anyone from knowing their grandparents/great grandparents? Why is it that we’ll punish the dead for us ineffectively protecting the living.

What does Congress want to do with it?
Approximately 8-9 million people a year are victims of identity theft. Here are some facts from a February 2012 FTC report: Government documents/benefits fraud makes up 27% of identity theft reports (the largest portion). It has increased 11% since 2009. Of the 27% total government/benefits fraud, tax or wage related fraud made up 24.1%. Government benefits, fraudulent driver’s licenses and other forged government documents are that remaining 2.9%,

Identity theft as a whole made up 15% of the fraud reports to the FTC in the 2011 calendar year. 50% of payments are wire transfers (up from 20% in 2009). 8% are consumers under the age of 19 (that’ll be important later). 15% are 60 years old and up. Since 2009, approximately a quarter of the complaints have been lodged by people in the 20-29 age range (and that number stays steady for each year with little variance). As a consumer ages, the percentage drops. According to the report, the IRS only filed 28 complaints itself in 2011. That’s less than 1% (Zero in 2009 and 2010). Most of the reports are coming straight from the consumer after finding out that their identity has been used fraudulently. After all these scary statistics, I should point out that Identity Theft Products are also on this complaint list (for not working) and that there was a February 2012 Consumer Reports about the fear-mongering going on to create a need for products that aren’t delivering the security they promise. I’d also like to point out that I found no clear statistic that stated how many dead people are having their identity stolen. I found individual cases and anecdotes, but no concrete proof that this is the large problem that I’ve been told in recent news stories it’s supposed to be. Congress loves to parade around the stories of parents of dead children finding out their precious baby was fraudulently claimed on someone else's taxes. But identity thefts for persons under 19 was what again? 8 percent (19,563 out of 248,538). How many of those are deceased children isn't really specified. And even deceased elderly relatives aren't where the largest numbers of fraud come from. It's the just-starting-out 20 year olds. Those who are capable of making mistakes with their own documents. I was able to find an article by the Legal Genealogist (really my go-to gal for Legalese) stating the problem with identity theft involving the dead was 1/10th of 1% of the problem. The living folks that are being conned into giving this information or are unaware of how to protect their information (twenty year olds, I'm looking your way) are what we need to focus on right now.

Because of how the SSA is set up, there would need to be a change in the law concerning the SSA to restrict access to it. And that’s what Congress is up to right now. Several bills have been introduced to reduce or outright ban access to anyone but Federal or State agencies. Congressman Sam Johnson has proposed one such bill (“Keeping IDs Safe Act of 2011”). That bill would remove access from anyone outside of Federal or State agencies needing to access records of deceased individuals. There are others who are proposing that records of the recently deceased (from 2-10 years) be removed from the public files. There are so many voices in this arena (and my post is now a book) that I can only say that ya’ll need to get to reading some of this information. I love the posts the Legal Genealogist has been doing and have linked a couple to this post. Get her in an RSS feed and really pay attention to the news surrounding these proposals. Your identity is at stake!

Now, there have been some changes to that public file already. November 2011, 4.2 million records were removed to comply with protected state death records from the public version of the DMF (the aforementioned SSDI). Basically, since the states were exempted from FOIA in the law asking them to provide death information to the SSA, they cannot be required to publicly share their information simply because they gave it to the SSA. The SSA can independently verify the death and then add the information themselves, but they usually only take the extra step for those individuals who received benefits or have surviving relatives who are benefits eligible. There was also a change to what is displayed in the index. The state/county of residence, ZIP code, last residence and ZIP code, and lump sum payment fields were all removed from the display. Because of the state exemption, the SSA estimates 1 million deaths each year will not be disclosed.

Who is Perholtz and what is FOIA?
FOIA stands for Freedom Of Information Act. Basically, this is the law says that we all have the right to obtain federal records (with a few exemptions). There is no requirement that the person asking for the records be a citizen of the U.S. If you wish to look up records on yourself, you can. You need to provide proof that you are who you say you are to ensure they aren’t giving away any information that is private. You can request records from any agency as long as you do so in writing and make a “reasonable” description of the information you seek.

What exemptions to this law are there?

1. Material classified as pertaining to national security by an Executive Order.
2. Internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.
3. Information prohibited from disclosure by another federal law.
4. Business trade secrets.
5. Communications that are protected by legal privileges (Client/Attorney for example)
6. Anything that would invade the personal privacy of another (you can’t use the federal government to stalk your ex).
7. Law enforcement information IF it would interfere with enforcement proceedings, hinder fair trial, expose a confidential informant, disclose an individual’s personal information, or endanger someone’s life.
8. Information about the supervision of financial institutions
9. Geological information on wells.

• There are also two law enforcement exclusions that prevent FOIA from hindering an on-going investigation if the subject of the investigation doesn’t know about it or disclosing informant information if the informant’s status hasn’t been officially confirmed.
• The FBI also has a special exclusion for classified intelligence, counterintelligence, and international terrorism records.

Ronald J. Perholtz filed a lawsuit in 1978 under FOIA (Perholtz v. Stanford G. Ross [SSA], Civ. No. 78-2385 and 78-2386, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 1980). He wished to have the death information released in order to prove pension fraud (just in case you wondered, he did prove fraud). The court decided that the dead didn’t have reasonable expectations of privacy and therefore the information could be released to Perholtz. Because of the number of requests the SSA received, it decided to make a public death file in order to decrease the FOIA requests (and save time and money in the long run). If Congress is able to restrict the DMF to government agencies, the number of FOIA requests will increase. No one believes that the courts will not require the information to be released upon reasonable request, so the DMF restrictions that Congress is asking for would only increase administrative and legal costs for the SSA. And as stated above, this will only hamper the work of honest individuals and companies without making our identities any safer.

Why should you (and everyone you know) care?
I want to start this last section by pointing out that at NO TIME was the SSN supposed to become a universal identifier. Since the beginning of the SSA, the administration has argued against using it for identification purposes and has flat out said that the system simply isn’t set up to be used as such. And yet, that’s what the government, businesses, financial institutions and everyone else have chosen for the end-all be-all of identification. Even today, those 9 little numbers aren’t secure enough to hold the gates to our identity. Yet, instead of coming up with a better system, we’re going to remove the public file that is designed to protect us and those institutions that provide us benefits from fraud.

In testimonies given before Congress and interviews to the press, the representatives of both the SSA and the IRS say that they have neither the finances nor the manpower to handle checking the DMF to prevent fraud. The IRS says that checking every SSN against the DMF would take so much time that returns would take longer. Is there no computer system that could be made to mirror the one employers can use? A simple, “yes, no, dead” code that would check the number? Considering the push for electronic filing, I don’t see how the name and SSN fields can’t be run for a match before confirming. Heck, couldn’t that be part of the tax software like H&R Block or something? I have to put in my name and address and phone number. I already give them my SSN. Why can’t there be a minute where the computer checks the DMF to make sure I’m not dead? They are supposed to be checking that!

The SSA has even said that it isn’t part of their job description to maintain the DMF. Well, in the strictest sense, no, but remember when I said it was created to reduce costs and manpower from all the FOIA requests? Remember the FOIA section above? Yeah, that’s what they’re predicting! They’ll need more money and people to handle the inevitable FOIA requests! I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but really? It all comes back to each agency saying that they are so bad at their jobs that they need more to do their jobs. If I’m bad at my job, I get fired. But then again, I don’t work in government.

Then there is a NY Times article that has several researchers stating that shutting down the DMF will NOT stop identity theft. Financial institutions are saying it will be HARDER to stop identity theft. So here we are, our house has a leak and our plumber wants to fix every pipe but the ones that are actually leaking. We are on the verge of greater problems in identity theft, higher research and government costs, and punishing all the good people in the world for the sake of pretending to stop the wicked.

But Congress wants us to please think of the children!
-Ana

Getting to Know Google

While the days of microfiche and dusty libraries aren't gone yet, technology is steadily improving to the point that one day we won't need to travel so far to find our roots. The majority of what we want to find isn't online; let me be clear about that. I've heard people figure it at about 5% of all the documents available are online. There are companies that are trying to digitise and transcribe as many records as they can. Ancestry has the World Archives Project and FamilySearch has Index projects that include the 1940 census. Until all the world's records are digitised, how do we know what's available online? And where do we find the documents that aren't? As I have already blogged, sometimes we just need to look to Google first. And interestingly, Google has a lot of tools that can make the life of a genealogist easier.

The most obvious is the search tool. Seriously, who doesn't know to "Google it"? Well actually, for many people it comes counter-intuitive to start with a Google search. I can't tell you the number of times I've "Googled it" for someone and found just what they were looking for on the first page. To others, the sheer volume of results can be daunting, especially for a common name. Well, take those hints from Crista about searching like a pro and use them here! Know what you are looking for and be specific. Use search operators like AND, OR, or - (Note and/or have to be in all caps to count or they'll be ignored). Lifehack did an article about searching Google like a pro, which I have bookmarked for easy reference. And did you know you could search Google Images by image now? That's right! There's a little camera on the right of the search bar. If you click on that, Google Images will let you add a photo to search. Now, it's still very new, so when you put in a black and white photo of a person, you get black and white photos of people new and old. Add some words "John So-n-so, 1864, Texas", and it'll help narrow your search.

But that's just the tip of our Google iceberg! Add to the search the toolbar download to have the search tool always ready. There are also a number of "buttons" you can add to help you. My favorite is the Translate tool. It can be very helpful when you are Googling where/how to find foreign records and the website is not in English. There's a Spell Checker to help when writing on a website (like Blogger). It's capable of spell check in a few languages, so if you know Spanish, but your spelling isn't always the best, Google will help! The "Highlight All" button will highlight the words from your search that are found on the page, making it easier for you to scan the page and decide if it's pertinent. You can add a share button so you can email, Facebook, Google+, blog, etc. your find to anyone you wish. Google has enhanced search features to find related content, auto fill forms and search bars with most likely information, and more. Please note: those features do take/share some of your information, so be sure to check all the settings to the level you want before proceeding! Also, there are third-party options that aren't Google, so check reliability of the company providing them.

There are three tools outside of searching that I use quite a bit. My favorite of course is Google Translate. I can input a bit of text from a document and Google will figure out what the language is and translate it for me. I used this tool to translate some postcards I got at an antique store that were from Germany 1912. Not life-changing information, but it was fun to read nonetheless. You can make special characters like å by using your computer's special characters map (You can find that in Accessories usually). It even suggested spelling changes if a letter was missed/unclear. Google Calendar is a great tool that can be accessed from a computer or smartphone. I share my calendar with family so they can see what I'm doing and when. This way, when they want to hang out with me, all they have to do is check the calendar. They can even add an event to a free moment if they want to reserve that time. If I'm headed to a library for the day, I've had relatives email me a list of items they need, or names of relatives that may be found in archives. Google Docs is a great place to store copies of pdf files, documents, and family group sheets. In fact, after clicking on "create" and choosing "from template", I was able to search "census" and found this 1790 census extraction form. Ancestry has a printable option, but here was one I could just type into. If I needed to do so, I could create and share a template for such a thing. And I know I've seen people asking for it, so there ya go.

In my blog post about genealogy and television, I mentioned YouTube. There are several channels devoted to genealogy by your favorite companies, but also by devoted fans and hobbyists. Judicious use of YouTube can also bring you finds like the 1940 census introduction. And the Google Books search was how I found an ebook of the Kemper line printed in 1899. It traced a great many Kempers back to our earliest ancestor, John Kemper of Virginia in 1714. There was a brief historical sketch of the earliest church record they found in Germany, but it was the names that were the most helpful. Using that book (with actual verified documents like birth records, marriage licenses and censuses) helped me connect to other Ancestry members who had information on their direct line to that tree as well. I only wish I could find more books about the other lines I'm working on! Picasa is Google's photo sharing option, and can be useful for keeping a centralised location for your digital photos. I use Flickr, but really it's personal preference, just like social networking. I'm sure a few of us use Facebook over Google+ just because our family and friends are more active on Facebook.

Speaking of social networking, Google+ is a clean version of what Facebook was pre-Timeline. Quite a few genealogy sites like Ancestry and Olive Tree have a presence on Google+, but it's underutilised......... so get over there now and give them a reason to patronise it! Google+ allows you to share photos, and tag people in them. Once they're tagged, Google can use their burgeoning face recognition options to find more photos of that person........ which sounds cool. Again, if you are privacy wary, this won't be something you want. Another great product from Google is Blogger. I won't link that one as you currently find yourself on Blogger reading this wonderful (and in my humble opinion, brilliant) article. You can create a blog to help others or just use as a journal of your own trials and tribulations. Share it with the world, or a select few. Blogger has it's own set of tools to make a useful landing zone for your information, be it in posts, photo or video. If you want something more of a website with the option for wikis and the like, Google Sites is your go-to area. (I actually have a draft blog about language study I'm thinking of transferring to a site instead. I think that'll be an easier format for what I really want to do.) Google Groups allows you to join or create a group on any topic you wish, from surnames to general genealogy. And Google Reader allows you to subscribe to a blog or site and get them in a simple news feed rather than hunt each one down every time you want to read them.

There are also a few I consider more "just for fun" than day-to-day useful. Panoramio is Google Maps meets Picasa. Search a location and see photographs of that location. Some old, some new, all beautiful. Really a great idea if you're planning a trip or want an idea of the environment your relatives lived in. Patent Search is useful if you had an inventor in the family and want to see their patent proposal (or if you want to invent something yourself and need to know if it's already in existence). Google Scholar will search out scholarly papers, legal opinions and journals and articles. A worthwhile option for someone wanting an opinion based on deep study; for example, how "experts" feel about archive handling and care. It's quite dry reading, as it's not prepared for common consumption, but the information can be invaluable to a serious mind.

We're always looking for ways to organise our research so that we aren't lost in it (or signed up for the show "Hoarders" by less than understanding relatives). There are so many great options in Google that you really should add it to your toolkit. Because I hear complaints about it all the time, it bears repeating that ONCE IT'S ON THE INTERNET, IT'S THERE TO STAY. Don't share what you are uncomfortable sharing. Read all privacy policies before using a product. Google spells it out very neatly in their new policies, so take the time to familiarise yourself with your options for protecting your rights. In the end, use it as much or as little as you are comfortable, but use it.

-See you on the interwebs!

Ana

Protecting the Living

Cousin Kevin- Adorable? Yes! In my public tree? NO!

There are days I wish my family would stop breeding so I could catch up! Cousin Chris has a baby, then Cousin Lori. Few more weeks and Cousin Amber will be adding to her brood. If I'm not adding birthdays (how old are you now, Angela?), it's anniversaries (congrats on one year, Jared!), weddings (when's the party, Jack?), or funerals (miss you every day, Crystal). I want to keep this information straight and get it down in the tree as soon as I find it, but what rules are there for living people? How do I make sure I'm not infringing on their privacy?

Well the first thing to understand is that most professional genealogists won't list a living person in a family tree. This is a pretty good rule for us amateurs too. The thing is, when you add information about a living person to something that may be viewed by others, some of them possibly not even related to you, you want to make sure that there is no way their identity can be compromised or stolen. There are a few ways to go about that and the best way is to just keep them off your online tree!

I do have a list of living relatives and their current information, but I try to keep that off my online tree so that I am sure their information is safe and uncompromised. Ancestry does have a built in feature for protecting the living by not showing any information about them. Most of the time it works. I have noticed that adding a photo to a living person does allow others to see a thumbnail of the photo in their hints pages. All it takes is a copy/paste and that photo is theirs now. And if you share your tree with others, they can take anything they like and make it as public as they feel it should be. So use some common sense and either don't share your tree, or keep your information of living relatives out!

If you simply must add a living person (maybe you don't want papers that you can lose floating around), there are two precautions you should take. First, tell the relatives that you are adding them and what information will be available. Make sure it's okay with them. Some people are less open than others and will not want all their information out in the ether. I have a private tree with living relatives on it that I use for research and to connect branches that sometimes connect to other parts of my tree. I don't share this one, and I put only the barest information on it. Just enough to make my connections. Second, don't add pictures! Like I said, the thumbnail can still be viewable, even if the actual picture isn't. Just play it safe and add them to a file folder on your computer for the individual. Not everything needs to be online.

As always, I am going to remind you that once it's on the Internet, there is no going back. Don't put anything online that you don't want found. No matter how secure you think a website is, there is always the possibility that it can be compromised.

-Ana

Copyrights and Copy Wrongs

Inevitably, someone uses another person's information, photos and documents and issues of copyright come up. But what laws protect your rights and how do you exercise them? When have you relinquished your rights? How do you keep yourself from infringing on the rights of others?

According to the U.S. Copyright Office FAQ, to keep yourself from infringing on the rights of others, you should ask before you use someone else's work. What if you don't know who that is? Well, the copyright office will do a search for you for a fee, or you can go to their offices and search yourself for free if the copyright is before 1978. You can search online for anything after 1978. Of course, this only works if they have registered the copyright, and a lot of what you'll use in everyday genealogy isn't registered.

What about fair use? Well according to fair use doctrine, you can use excerpts or quotes for the purpose of commentary, criticism, news reporting or scholarly reports. Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules, so sometimes you'll get away with it, other times not. If you are worried about not being protected by fair use, ask for permission to use the work. Always better safe than sorry. According to the copyright office, "Copyright protects the particular way authors have expressed themselves. It does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in a work." So there is a lot of grey area on both ends of this argument.


What do you mean I don't own my photographs? That's right, you don't own any photo of your own family unless you yourself took the picture. The photographer, or the owner of the photography studio, owns those photos and reproducing them can be infringement! Of course, most photographers won't enforce this copyright unless you start to use the photos for profit or they somehow feel misrepresented with your use of the photo.

Acknowledging the owner doesn't transfer ownership! Just because you give the original copyright owner credit doesn't mean you can use the work unless there is an expressly written agreement to that affect.

So how long do copyrights last? Well that depends on a few factors including what the work is and when it was created/published. After January 1, 1978, a copyright lasts 70 years after the author's death. If there is no author, or it's a work for hire, the termination of copyright is 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation (whichever is shorter). These are general rules and they get wonky when you start talking about publications before 1978, so I provided this link so you can familiarise yourself with some rules.



How do I protect what's mine???? Well first, know what's yours! Unless you created it, you aren't the owner. I don't care if you paid for a copy, you aren't the owner of the original work. You would need express written permission to post things willy-nilly on any website, blog or book. If someone contacts you saying you have their pictures/document/whatever and they want you to remove it, just do it. You can be facing serious litigation should they wish to pursue it and fair use isn't fairly implemented!



This is totes copyrighted!!!1!!11! Do not reproduce!



If it's a photo you are sharing online, add a watermark via photo software. If you're just worried that the people will attach the photograph to the wrong person(s) in their tree, do as I've shown here and label the people in the photo. Add a line about the date or location. Some people have complained that others are saving a copy of their photo and then uploading it to their tree. What this does on Ancestry.com is erase the original owner. Why's this a big deal? Well, when the next person wants more photos, they'll ask the copier who may have just the one. Meanwhile there you are with albums upon albums of precious memories to share and no one knows how to contact you!

As always, I remind you that ANYTHING shared publicly online can be taken by anyone who knows how to copy/paste. It doesn't make it right, and there are laws to protect you if you wish to retain a lawyer and pursue a suit. Many people will feel that if you chose to display it publicly, you are implying consent of use. And any site, whether it is Ancestry, Facebook, Youtube, etc. have terms and conditions that state that copyright infringement will not be tolerated if you can prove it and that they take no responsibility if there is an infringement, beyond helping to take it down. Ancestry even takes it farther to specifically mention that they take no responsibility for what you post (outside of obscene or copyrighted material), what people share, or any public member tree errors. So if you want your information to stay your information, don't post it publicly and don't share it. Even if you don't post it online, any family member you give it to can do so and lead to world of trouble. So know your rights and what the company will do to help you BEFORE you post.

With that all said, I'd like to end by asking that you share any and all information you feel comfortable with. I know there are those who feel that they spent time and money to hunt these items down and they don't want to just give them away; but for me, anything I have that can help means that that is one less step you have to take on the journey. It becomes a collective move forward. And by sharing the factual items I have, you can build a better family tree. There are always those who will abuse the right and add things that aren't true. But there's little I can do about that besides stress out. I can only hope that they will be a minority and that people following their research will see how flawed it is and ignore it. Life's too short to go scream at the wind.

-Ana

Share and Share Alike

I can tell you I troll a few Facebook communities and genealogy forums and I watch what people are saying. One thing that has come up quite often on Ancestry's Facebook page is whether or not to make a tree "public" or "private". And since I was trapped this weekend at a relative's house looking through all her old photos, and the repercussions that followed, I got to thinking.

First, the weekend's conversation (in short form):

Me: Aunty, I've been looking for birth records on Great Uncle RumRunner and I can't seem to find them. Do you have a copy or know more about him?

Aunt Kooky: Well he was adopted. But that still means he's family.

Me: Of course he is. Did he know he was adopted? Do we know his birth relatives? Just for history's sake, really. It's not about him not being family, but maybe his kids will one day want to know about it and adoptions are hard to trace.

Aunt Kooky: Oh, well, yes he knew. Uncle RumRunner was the son of Great Grandma's first marriage. Grandpa adopted him when he was three. But you can't put that on your tree. I know you have a public tree on Ancestry and he might see it and feel like he's singled out.

Me: Uh, okay. Well it's not exactly how the tree works. *Explains how I can set Great Grandpa as "preferred" parent and being a public tree just means that if his "real" father had more kids, we may connect with some half-siblings and cousins, "and isn't that exciting?"*

Aunt Kooky: Oh well that makes sense. Here's photos of his real father and Great Grandmother. You can share those on your tree now that I am understanding it a bit more.

----

Me: Oh make me copies of these family reunion photos please!!!!

Cousin Helpful: No problem, I have a scanner and I'll make you a file to take to your computer. Let's spend the next several hours noting who is in each and every shot.

Me: Well if we're on the computer, let's add them to my facebook for the family!

Cousin: Splendid idea!!!!

----

*Phone rings early next morning*

Aunt Overreactive: HOW DARE YOU PUT PHOTOS OF ME ON THE INTERNET! I DON'T WANT ANY PICTURES OF ME ANYWHERE AND YOU WILL TAKE THEM DOWN RIGHT NOW!

Me: *half joking* Who is this?

Aunt Overreactive: I don't like my information just floating in the ether of the internet! I know your Facebook is friends only, but once something is on the internet, it never comes off. Dateline told me so! Now get up and get rid of those pictures before they're cached or something! And say hi to your dad when you see him Sunday.

*Not wanting to get into the "If you're worried about privacy, why do you have a Facebook account, I go to the computer to comply with her request*

Me: Well, golly, did every one of her kids have to email me about removing their mother from my pictures???? And there's an email from Cousin Somewhat Related saying some of the older photos are copies he gave to my cousin and didn't want them shared online........crap on a cracker.

Now, this is very truncated from the whole three days I spent with family trying to whittle information and photos out of them, but it seemed to really bring home some points people were making on the forums. Once something is on the internet or in someone else's hands, how much control do you have over anything? I've seen many complaints by people who's information and photos have been attached erroneously to someone not even related to them in another tree. They bemoan the heartache of their family member being used so unjustly. Their request to have the error fixed goes unanswered. There are those who have private trees specifically to protect the privacy of their relatives and they share only upon request. And what happens? Much to their horror, someone adds their private information on a public tree!!!! "I asked them not to share it and they did anyway!" Again, their request to rectify the mistakes goes unheeded. The weird one is the people with public trees that want to make it so private trees can't save their information. Why? "Because if they aren't sharing, I don't want to share with them." Really?

A note on the types of trees:

When you use Ancestry.com as a place for your tree online, you have three options:

1. The public tree. All that you add will be searchable. People, stories, photos, news articles.... all of it is available and anyone can find it and attach it to their tree. I use public trees. I want to help others by making the information easier to find and hopefully connect with another relation that may have different pieces of our collective puzzle.

2. Private, searchable tree. This means that when someone searches for information about their relative, they'll see a connection to your tree, photos or stories, but won't see the actual information. They'll need to contact you to get it. This is for those people who for whatever reason don't want the stuff just floating around, but feel they should be willing to share with a legitimate relative.

3. Private, unsearchable. This means that it won't show up in searches and no one knows it's there unless you tell them it is. This is a good option for those worried about privacy or if they know their information may be filled with errors and they want to correct them before compounding the problem by sharing the information.

There are many reasons why someone would want to privatise their information. A belief in personal privacy is the biggest. Wanting to share information with legitimate family or serious researchers is another big one. People who have just started (or have little information to share) may not want a public tree until they've gotten used to the system. They don't want to add to the myriad of already incorrect trees. On the other hand, sometimes a well-seasoned researcher can make someone feel awfully low for being wrong. Newbies are sensitive, sometimes overly so, and they take it as a personal attack when someone else is trying to be helpful by reminding them to check their work. So they hide until they have the confidence to jump into "the big leagues". These are just a few of the more often cited reasons I've seen, there are more I'm sure. And not everyone who makes a private tree is unwilling to share..... they just want to be asked first.

When it comes to what you pick for yourself, it's just preference. Now, I'm going to say this and take it how you like, but- no matter how "private" you make your information, it is on the internet and stored in someone else's server. If you truly do not want something to get out of your control, DON'T PUT IT ON THE INTERNET. While Ancestry and many sites like it are very secure, you are accepting a level of risk by putting it out of your hands and into the web. I don't put anything out that I don't mind people finding and as such, I have had only one private tree. When I got a GEDCOM from an Uncle, I privatised it simply because I didn't know what he had. What he had was a load of errors. I've since added much of that tree to my public ones and I am slowly pulling it apart one person at a time. I have connected with a few private tree members and follow their wishes to keep their information off my tree. That stuff is saved on my computer or printed out. It makes my organisation a bit harder, but that's the agreement. More often than not, however, the private tree member has no problem with me adding it to my public tree if I cite where I got the record properly.

Now, when it comes to what other's choose to do with their tree, and this is important.....You have zero control.  I've found that most public member trees are ran by those with an altruistic approach to genealogy. They figure why make someone hunt it down if they've already done the legwork and can help. That's awful nice of them, and they usually understand that that means it'll not always be reciprocated. They may connect to someone who has less than they do, or is unwilling to share what they have. People may abuse their generosity and connect it to the wrong people on accident or purpose. Sometimes they express frustration, like private tree owners, that they message a member and get no response (or a rude one). But what can you do? Maybe the other person is no longer using Ancestry. The information doesn't get deleted, so it's out there forever. Maybe they don't want to connect to other people. Or maybe they aren't actively checking that branch or person and are engrossed in fact-finding elsewhere on their tree. It's on their "things to do", but just not "to do right now". Or maybe they are really that silly and believe that they have all the proof they need to make their case that their tree is right and your's is wrong. (Isn't everyone able to find their royal connections within the free 14 day trial?)

Whatever the case, trying to change them is like trying to scream at the wind. It'll do what it's going to do and all you get is high blood pressure and a sore throat. With that, I conclude by asking that you always try to see the other side's view and collaborate rather than contaminate. We are all at different levels of expertise and everyone needs a helping hand. Respect the wishes of your contributors and family on private matters, but also remember that privacy means different things to different people. I've learned my lesson on this one. I've asked permission from my relatives to make the information I'm given public. We also have an understanding that anything that should be kept "private" will be, as long as they tell me. I've taken the time this last weekend to explain to those concerned just what I am putting up there. I even invited a few of them to the tree and helped them set up their account to view it. And Cousin Somewhat Related gave me a happy email on Sunday with all the permissions I needed to have his photos.....for which I traded several family recipes and the promise to visit him soon.

-Ana