Restricted records in FS
I was at my FHC this morning adding to my source box images of restricted records. It was my understanding, from someone with FS, that images of restricted records attached to a record or source box should still be visible outside of the FHC. That apparently is not the case. Does anyone know whether or not this is still true?
I had originally intended to download the selected images to my laptop. Which I have been able to do in the past. Apparently I am no longer able to see restricted records on my laptop within the FHC. Is it just my FHC or it this true with all FHC's?
My FHC only has double monitor computers, which I and the volunteers were unfamiliar with and I was not successful in downloading the images to my flash drive. I must have inserted the flash drive into the wrong monitor. My last resort was downloading the actual image into my source box, since the option to attach to FamilyTree was greyed out.
All in all, not a good start to the day.
Best Answer
-
FYI
Just in passing ...
As far as I was originally aware, for "Restricted" Records (ie. "Sources"), that were obtained, WHILE at a "Family History Centre" of the Church (and/or, at an "Affiliate" Library); and, either, (1) attached to an individual/person (or, Couple); and/or, (2) placed to one's "Source Box", STILL could NOT be 'accessed'/'seen' (ie. the URL), from "Home", at a later date, by a User/Patron, who DOES NOT have "Access Rights", to those "Restricted" Records (ie. "Sources").
And, as far as I was originally aware, the EXACT Same, holds true, of Records (ie. "Sources") that are "Saved" to 'FamilySearch', from, "Ancestry_com"; "FindMayPast_co_uk" ["FindMayPast_com"]; "MyHeritage_com"; and, the like; or, for that matter, ANY "External" Website; where, there are ACCESS "Restrictions".
Now ...
That Said ...
FYI
Just a week or so ago ...
I was 'belatedly', watching a more recent "Podcast", by "Family History Ron"; being, Ron TANNER, of 'FamilySearch'.
During that "Podcast", 'Ron' said something, that for all 'intents and purposes', basically implied (well, the possible perceived implication being) that once a "Restricted" (and/or, "External") Record (ie. "Source"), with "Access Restrictions", was ADDED to (ie. attached to) an individual/person (or, Couple); THEN, regardless, of the "Access Restrictions", that said Record (ie. "Source"), that the URL, could be 'seen'/'accessed' by ANY User/Patron (even those WITHOUT "Access Rights"), from within "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch'.
I was somewhat bemused ...
And, I thought, 'Wow', that is something certainly NEW ...
So much so ...
That such intrigued me ...
Following the "Podcast", I have since done some digging/investigation ...
NOTHING has "Changed" ...
As such ...
I would suggest ...
That in the aforementioned "Podcast", what 'Ron' simply meant to imply, was that, one COULD certainly "Attached", the "Restricted" Records (ie. "Sources"), with "Access Restrictions", to an individual/person (or, Couple), in "Family Tree", of 'FamilySearch'.
But ...
NOT that once "Attached", those "Restricted" Records (ie. "Sources"), with "Access Restrictions", that the URL, could be 'seen'/'accessed', by ANY User/Patron (even those WITHOUT "Access Rights"), from within "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
Just my thoughts.
Brett
ps: The perceived implication, by 'Ron', in the "Podcast", was somewhat open to interpretation ...
...... [ At the time, it certainly had me wondering ... ]
.
1
Answers
-
If a record says the image will only be available when you are at a Family History Center, it should not be available to view outside of that location. That is why we identify which images will be available for other's to see if we choose to attach them in Family Tree, or simply move them to the Source Box.
Please remember that FamilySearch support does not place restrictions upon the images; it is the record custodians who have control any restrictions that are put in place. We hope the following knowledge articles will be helpful.
This final article explains that in certain cases, downloading an image may be prohibited by the legal agreements between FamilySearch and the organization or government that owns the image. Perhaps that is the explanation that is connected to your experience.
We hope this information answers you question.
2 -
(The "Attach to Family Tree" button is grayed out if and only if there is indexed data associated with the image. It has nothing to do with viewing restrictions. Attaching an image using the button will not make any access restrictions go away.)
0 -
Here is a link from the Help Center explaining about restricted records. If you scroll down the article there is a reminder, This reminder explains about Restricted records not being able to be viewed outside the FHC.
Access restrictions on Historical Records • FamilySearch
Reminders
If you share restricted records with public guests, it violates our contracts with the image owners. They could remove the records for everyone as a result. Help the guest sign in to FamilySearch and find the image. Missionaries should never ask members to sign in for someone else.
Please note that we have no way to give the general public access to restricted historical records outside of a family history center or an affiliate public library. The copyright holders and privacy laws of the locality determine the restrictions. We are bound by our contracts and the law.
2 -
Thank you for your answers.
Brett, I viewed the Ron Tanner podcast of Oct 7 and he did talk about others being able to view a restricted image that has been attached. I wonder if he meant they can see it only at a FHC/Affiliate Library. I cannot see the original images of restricted records that I have attached to the tree at home. So I believe he is talking about the non-member and only at a FHC. That is why I download them to my laptop, similar to what was done during the microfilm years. You download it and study it at home. I am referring to German church records.
I find it frustrating that these images are blocked, and yes I understand what everyone is saying. But I have run into either poorly indexed records or insufficient information being indexed that makes the indexed record useless. Especially true when you have multiple people with the exact same name and all you have is a year of marriage, which could belong to any of the people in question.
Someone posted on a FB group for FS, that they work for FS with the contracts for copyright holders etc. He said that most contracts have not been updated in a long time. Does anyone know anything about this. Do you know who to talk to.
If I am looking at German records, I would have no idea where in Germany to write for access to the information I need.
0 -
There are certainly some indexed collections that can only be accessed / attached to IDs at a Family History Centre, but can still be seen on returning home. (I don't want to name them and suddenly find viewing from home is not longer possible!) However, I believe the restrictions to images does mean the same restriction applies (upon returning home) even if they have been added at a FHC (or Affiliate library).
1 -
"Someone posted on a FB group for FS, that they work for FS with the contracts for copyright holders etc. He said that most contracts have not been updated in a long time. Does anyone know anything about this. Do you know who to talk to."
A lot of contracts were made in the era of microfilm and haven't been updated for digital microfilm. FS has said in the past that they try to interpret these contracts in a way that makes sense for today. If the terminology used is loose enough, FS can "creatively" interpret the contract and publish the digital microfilms even though the contract was signed before that technology existed. However there is still a lot of work for FS to do to update these and allow for more access.
I have a fair bit of experience with German church records. Protestant records on FS are usually only available to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This is because these records are also on the subscription website Archion. Catholic records are usually accessible from FHCs and Affiliate Libraries only. This is because the Catholic Church doesn't want Latter Day Saints accessing their records to use in LDS ordinances, so the restrictions are a compromise between that policy and the desires of genealogists to have access.
0 -
FYI
'Yes', I would suggest, you are correct, that IS what 'Ron' meant ...
I would humbly suggest, that is was just, the way; and, the 'off-hand', in passing, manner, that he said it; which, was open to (mis)interpretation.
As, I said ...
▬ I was somewhat bemused ...
▬ And, I thought, 'Wow', that is something certainly NEW ...
Obviously ... I was not alone ...
NOTHING has changed ...
One may/should (depending on the LEVEL of "Restriction") be able to, 'access'; and, 'attach' (and/or, 'download', to one's "Source Box"), a "Restricted" Record (ie."Source"); WHILE, at a "Family History Centre" of the Church (and/or, at an "Affiliate" Library); BUT, one Still CANNOT 'accessed'/'see', the URL [of the "Restricted" Record (ie."Source")], from "Home", at a later date, if one DOES NOT have "Access Rights", to that "Restricted" Record (ie. "Source").
As such ...
IF, one WANTS to keep a "Copy" of the "Restricted" Record (ie. "Source"), for later use/perusal; THEN, where such is available, one MUST, "Download"; and/or, "Print" (or, if such are NOT available, "Screenshot"), the "Image" of the record.
But ...
That Said ...
Be warned ...
You can ONLY "Download" a LIMITED number of "Images"; BEFORE, you get ... "It appears that you may have data needs that exceed the general use license and purpose ...".
▬ I have 'seen'/'heard', about NINE (x9) images, before the limitation 'kicks in' ...
▬ Sometimes, LESS - All depends on the particular Record Set ...
Here is a "Knowledge Article" in 'FamilySearch'
I get an error message when downloading from Historical Records
Now ...
That Said ...
'Yes' ... "Access Restrictions" ... are, "Frustrating", to put it nicely (ie. 'mildly') ...
Briefly ...
"Restrictions", placed on the, availability; and, access, of Records in 'FamilySearch', is dictated by the Record "Custodian", not 'FamilySearch'.
Those "Restrictions" are under "Contractual Arrangements"/"Agreements", between, the Record "Custodian"; and, 'FamilySearch'.
"Restrictions", are placed on Records, by the Record "Custodian", for various (usually. "Commercial") reasons.
There is NOT much that 'FamilySearch' can do about it.
'FamilySearch' TRIES to make Records, available; and, accessible, to ALL; but, such cannot always be the case.
Part of the reason for such, is that the Record "Custodian", is able to charge a FEE for access to such Records themselves; and/or, that the Record "Custodian" may have also given (usually, through the payment of some kind) the 'access rights' to a "Commercial" Website; and, the "Commercial" Website DOES NOT want the Records to be FREELY, available; and, accessible, in/on 'FamilySearch'. Hence, the "Restrictions", by the Record "Custodians".
And ...
Here are some "Knowledge Articles" in 'FamilySearch':
Why did some historical records disappear from FamilySearch?
Why are there access restrictions on Historical Records?
Why do some indexes have access limitations?
https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/why-are-some-indexes-restricted
What are the image restrictions in Historical Records?
Image not available in historical records.
https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/image-not-available-in-historical-records
.
I know that these do not help; but, I hope that they give you some further, insight; and, perspective.
And ...
'Yes', there must be, COUNTLESS, "Contractual Arrangements"/"Agreements", between, 'FamilySearch'; and, the, MANY; Many; many, Record "Custodians".
That in itself, MUST be a LEGAL, "Minefield"; and, "Nightmare" ...
Imagine, trying to keep on top of, ALL those. MANY; Many; many, "Contractual Arrangements"/"Agreements", that are "Everchanging"; and, being, "Updated".
The COST alone, would be astronomical, to (and, borne by) the Church (which, is DOES NOT pass on such, to Users/Patrons) just maintaining such.
Just my thoughts.
Again, I know that these do not help; but, I hope that they give you some further, insight; and, perspective.
Brett
0
