Has FamilySearch been hacked?
I noticed that someone has taken some Memory photos attached to ancestors of mine, and uploaded additional AI versions of them. While I'm not complaining about the AI versions (they look phenomenal), I can't help but wonder if this is sanctioned activity. I notice that whoever is doing it has the ability to change the font in both the Memory's title and the breadcrumb navigation menu in the family search website itself! Fonts are cool, but as a research and database tool I think the standard fonts designed into the FamilySearch website should not be alterable. See picture attached. I've circled the strange fonts in red.
Answers
-
Probably be best if you post a link to the actual memory in Family Tree so people can poke around and see what is going on with the fonts and breadcrumbs.
Your image upload did not work.
It does not sound like any hacking is going on. All memories have a download button. When you upload a photo , you give FamilySearch an unrestricted and unlimited license to it as stated in the terms of use. See: https://www.familysearch.org/legal/familysearch-content-submission-agreement
Part of this states: “As part of this license, you give us unlimited permission to copy, publicly display, transmit, broadcast, publicly perform, distribute, sublicense, create derivative works from (including, without limitation, by combining all or a portion of your Contributed Content with that of other contributors or by otherwise modifying your Contributed Content), and to otherwise use (and allow others to use) your Contributed Content throughout the world, by any means we deem appropriate (electronic or otherwise, including on the Internet).”
Under the main terms of use at https://www.familysearch.org/legal/terms it does state: “Unless otherwise indicated, you may view, download, and print materials from this site only for your personal, noncommercial use…” which is consistent with there being that download link on photos. So as long as that other person is not selling the AI versions or otherwise using them commercially, things seem to be falling inside the terms of use.
0 -
I understand that memories are downloadable and that license agreements bequeath permissions. I would be surprised, however, if FamilySearch is doing wholesale AI embellishments of Memory photos without so much as a mention of it. If private users are doing it to random persons/memories then I find it odd they can affect the font rendering of the website.
Edit: Apparently the image attachment feature of this forum is broken, as no formats work. So, The link to the corrupted memories is at https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/memories/LXWS-RPN
You can see the odd fonts underneath the photos. Opening one of the photos you'll see corrupted breadcrumb fonts.
0 -
There was discussion in this forum a few days ago about memories that had been downloaded and colorized/enhanced and an altered version uploaded.
From your link to profile LXWS-RPN, that may be the case here, as there is a different username attached to the new versions of the photos. You can also see that different username in the changelog for that profile.
You can contact the user who created the new version, by private message, by clicking on that username.
In that previous discussion, I brought up the legalities of such action. https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/455859#Comment_455859
0 -
I am a long time user of FamilySearch. I would like to understand the reason why the colorization of photos is being permitted. I love contributing & sharing but also want to keep the integrity of these old photos. I have contributed many photos & would appreciate a feature that notifies me, the original contributor, when something is happening (colorization enhancement) to that photo. Perhaps it is already available as part of that feature?
Help me understand the reasoning behind the action of colorization, and its benefits. Thank you.
0 -
You would have to ask the person who did the colorization. I can't speak to someone else's reasons.
In my own private tree - not the collaborative FamilySearch tree - I sometimes test one of the programs for photo restoration/colorization to try to improve a faded snap in the same way I sometimes adjust brightness/contrast for the image of an old document to improve legibility.
0 -
I am not a big fan of colorization either - but still, if a photo is in the public domain - people can colorize items to their hearts content - nothing legally or ethically wrong with that - I think it quite possible the people behind these colorization programs are probably genealogy companies themselves who have been able to make money off the capability.
You may want to keep the photo - as it was in its original state - and you can do that - no one can directly edit the item you uploaded - but they can download a copy and then make their own version of it. But why would FamilySearch prevent other people from colorizing a photo if they so wish.
What is then benefit of colorizing ?? - COLOR - - nothing really beyond that - you can see the photo as it would/could have been if it had been taken with color photography. Again Im not a big fan - but why would FS censor such items??
really no different than other forms of "Photoshopping"
I totally recommend people denote items that have been photoshopped or colorized - but what can you do if they dont???
Family Search themselves are not behind the colorization - simply users that wish to colorize their own version of a photo and upload it.
1 -
Mod comment: I fixed the picture in the original post so it was viewable.
0
