Experience of photos being added to wikitree being used elsewhere

Question

I wanting to understand whether any wikitree users have experienced problems with people downloading images and using them on other, more viral sites.

I got really sad when ancestry started sharing back photos of my relatives as recommendations when they had been originally uploaded by me, with some users downloading them and reloading them as seemingly their own contribution. It was somehow worse when it was a very distantly related user. I solved that, and various other challenges, by taking my tree private.

But it is such a joy to stumble across a photo of an ancestor that someone else has uploaded that I want to be able to support that.

After reading FindAGrave's rules I thought i might be okay posting them there. There are a couple more barriers to people using them elsewhere. Each photo I upload is scribbled on (here's a link to example of my Grandad https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/229157353/george-houseman) but i also add a note that I would be happy to share clean scans for personal use.

Unfortunately in the last few weeks I have had to message people on both FamilySearch and Ancestry to say that they have violated terms of use on FindAGrave as they had downloaded and uploaded photos. In both cases this was resolved very quickly, but am now starting to think whether I was wise to have even added them initially.

Which brings me to wikitree. I've read some G2G posts about bios being copied and pasted elsewhere and wondered what people's experiences had been in relation to photos?

Thanks

Answer 1

I've also experienced instances where entire biographies, translations, images, and more have been copied to other sites without attribution, particularly on platforms like Ancestry.

While I acknowledge Kathie's comment that complete control over the information once it's online is challenging, I believe in being vigilant about having the content removed when needed. I routinely submit takedown requests directly to sites like Ancestry, and I've found that the content is typically removed within hours.

However, not all content reuse is negative. Genealogy is about discovery and information sharing, and I'm supportive of content reuse if it is attributed to WikiTree. For example, if the content includes the profile the information was taken from (which already includes the names of people adding the information/content), it helps to advertise WikiTree, which I see as a positive outcome.

Comments

Thanks. The joy of collaboration is exactly why I'm trying to work out some sort of a balance. I must say that when I contacted the individuals about the photos they responded properly. Marking the photos has been a helpful way for me to track that it is indeed the photo I uploaded which has been used.

Answer 2

Once you post something on the web you really lose all control over any future use.  It doesn't really matter what copyright laws or usage rules are, people will take anything they like and use it without attribution.  That's just how the web operates.  You will often find the same images attached to multiple completely unrelated people.  

Wikitree tries to observe the copyright laws and the usage rules of other sites, but in many cases people have no idea where the image they are sharing actually came from so are unaware that it was originally posted with restrictions on re-use.

Comments

Thanks and understood. I guess I'm trying to find a balance. I've always thought of wikitree-ers as being more respectful than average users of some other sites and therefore the likelihood of this happening lower, but that might just be supposition which is why i am interested in whether others might have experienced this.

---

WikiTree's terms of service at https://www.wikitree.com/about/terms.html do not place any significant restrictions on data reuse.