Find A Grave
Reviews and Complaints

My biggest complaint with this site is the fact that several members refuse to transfer memorials that they created of my relatives, even if they are not related. Some of thse folks, are cemetery walkers, transcribers, who have no relation to the graves that they record.

While this is a valuable and much-appreciated service, it boggles my mind that there are some there that do not care if this is your great-grand uncles memorial, 'they' created it, so 'they' should not transfer it, 'Because it doesnt fall within the Find A Grave guidelines'...meaning a closer relative than a great-grand-uncle (as an example). FAMILY IS FAMILY. It doesnt matter to me if you created a memorial of my g-g-g-grandfather, if its my family, and not yours, then you should transfer it. This should not be negotable.

The moderators are of no help, as they have their favorites, and if you have the misfortune of one of their favorites creating your relatives memorial, and the favorite wont transfer, then you are out of luck. Some of those contributors care more about pumping up their numbers, than doing the right thing.

This is a terrific site until you tick off the CR staff once you do that forget it they delete your memorials purge you from the website etc. Do not communicate with you,or ask if are guilty of what you are accused of and yes when you search their data base even though your relatives are there they do not always come up. And even if you ask nicely a lot of the time your memorial will not be transferred to quote one contributor just because you are a relative does not mean you have the right to own the memorials and I am within my rights by not transferring just think if I had the time to add a hundred thousand memorials to this website I would not have time to eat, sleep etc

I agree with the people who complain about recent deaths. There should be a 30 day waiting period for family to post a recent death.

If it is posted by a non-family member and they refuse to transfer, the memorial should be taken down. I have complained once about this and *** transferred it to me. As a whole, the site is wonderful. If you do not like the site, you do not have to ever go there.

I have found in life that some folks' alarm clock goes off to the tune of ***, ***, ***.

They could never be pleased in the front seat in heaven. Life is passing them by and they cannot do one thing about it.

Thanks for all the volunteers

Findagrave.com is done by individuals that volunteer their time to take the pictures and do research. For the most part I have found them extremely accurate and when I did find an error, I wrote the person that posted the listing and they immediately corrected the file. I do professional genealogy research and find the site one of the best, most accurate sources I have ever found.

You create the memorial yourself & can "visit" it anytime. You can also post pictures, memorial messages, etc.

I LOVE this site!

As Christy stated....this is done by volunteers and if you can't find your relative listed then they have not been entered. But if you know the name of the name and location of the cemetery, you can become a member, for free, and add the relative yourself with all the info that is asked for (or just some of what you know) and then request a photo be taken of the headstone and someone will take it for you. Some people on the site only do that...take photos for people who request them and not enter any data in the system.

I found that a lot of my relatives were not listed in the cemeter I knew they were so I just added their info. I was able to find a cousin buried in Florda and was able to view his grave stone, I am very happy with the site. It is good for doing one's family history.

The grave information is all user submitted. If you can't find your relatives it's because nobody has recorded their burial info yet.

Jim Tipton is ***.

All the pitiful little maggots that he lets drive the sight are on the same level as Tipton; ***. They're pathetic little vermin with no significant lives of their own.

I removed all of my additions/submissions to the site and denounce anything and everything that Jim Tipton and his pathetic little minions stand for.

HERE HERE! Very well said! Concise, accurate and to the point!

I did not know how upset people were getting about me using different names on this website. I assumed because the site tracks the town and state people would be able to identify my posts.

In July something was wacky with the site.All my posts are listed under Madison Wisconsin from July 1, 2012 to July 27,2012 On July 28 it changes to Minneapolis, Minnesota. I will now stick to using one name to help you all out but if I forget remember all of July Madison WS and Minneapolis Minnesota to date.

And me? I guess I must be from Englewood, Colorado. That what the post says :zzz

Seems that administrator the one that wears the red lamp shade to cover her devil eyes who also wants what she refers to as pests to play in a microwave loves to suspend members account...it speaks volumes of her evil character.

I think you get what you pay for :grin and since tipton does not have to pay them they are just volunteers dealing or rather not dealing with issues in their spare time. Their only ability is to ban people when people get upset that they don't follow the rules and are bias in their application of said rules or ignore them all together my 1st ever encounter was with Julie who deleted my memorial and replaced it with one her mom made from a death index and added it to a random cemetery.

Then Julie duped the memorial deleted the 2 photos of the headstone and place a new photo request I was like OMG seariously abusing a volunteer system because you dont want me to own my own memorial !! sick

YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT (counted58x)

LKat has been reported to FSH and they have assured me that only family can give permission for a gravestone to be photographed. In fact there was a local story about the ongoing problem with f.a.g.

members violating cemetery policies not just a the national cemeteries but local private cemeteries. They are onto these vultures that are helping jim tipton profiting from gravestones in their cemeteries. The local news even had a video from a family member that recorded LKat going down the row taking pictures of gravestones at the national cemetery and the administration was appalled. They have her licensed plate number and have informed the workers if they see her to contact the office and they will have the police serve her with trespassing after she has been warned.

Good riddance no more vultures at FSH! She will also be ticketed for not have a licensed plate on the front of her car...she doesn't like to obey Texas laws typical f.a.g.

vampire. lmao, you could use to lose weight and not just off you as..s.

We are aware of L. Kathleen Caldwell and have advised her that she/he is not authorized to photograph gravestones, graves or temporary markers unless they are her immediate family.

We are trying to get a handle on people that are violating cemetery policies.

Please inform our administration if you witness anyone taking photographs at the cemetery.

Wow, I love how you tried to make this look like it is 'officially' coming from Fort Sam Houston Cemetery. Yes, this is exactly the forum in which they would respond. It is not illegal to take pictures at a government cemetery.

Can I assume LMAO, based on your use of sarcasm that you are a active member of findagrave. I do thank you you for the comment because it will help new users understand what kind of people are using the site and that they will have to interact with them.

If anyone wants to use an abuse free website try billion graves its amazing you can upload personal photos and bios for each person and the process is less time consuming and less expensive. The owners are in the billion graves face book group and are happy to help you solve a problem by actually responding.

Applause!

FIND A GRAVE MEMBER LKAT IS NOTHING BUT A FILTHY VULTURE, SHE STANDS ON FRESHLY BURIED VETERANS GRAVES (BURIED THAT DAY) @ FORT SAM HOUSTON NATIONAL CEMETERY. I HAVE WITNESSED HER FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS STANDING ON FRESHLY BURIED VETERANS GRAVES & THEIR SPOUSES GRAVES TAKING PICTURES OF THE TEMPORARY MARKERS SO SHE CAN RUN HOME AND CREATE A MEMORIAL.

MY GRANDFATHER WAS BURIED THERE 2 YEARS AGO AND I SAW HER BEING A VULTURE AND ASK WHO SHE WAS AND WHAT SHE WAS DOING...TURNS OUT SHE IS A FIND A GRAVE VULTURE!

FEEDING OFF THE DEATHS OF VETERANS AND THEIR FAMILY

She has been reported to the cemetery administration. Hopefully she will be banned from the grounds. I was assured that what she is doing is not only illegal but will not be tolerated.

Seems that administrator the one that wears the red lamp shade to cover her devil eyes who also wants what she refers to as pests to play in a microwave loves to suspend members account...it speaks volumes of her evil character.

They work for free that is what qualifies them Tipton likely retains 100% profit and gets everyone to work for free Proof administrators cannot handle the job they fill can be seen with the hundreds of people they ban

I will keep sending my complaint to the BBB along with copies of my credit card charges to get a refund of the memorials I foolishly sponsored.

BEWARE OF FIND A GRAVE!!

BEWARE OF JIM TIPTON & DEB DASH!

awwww :sigh Im sorry you were attacked you are not the only one. There are some really great people on the site and using the site for what it is claiming it is.

There are to many of the other kind of people like kermit who get off on putting other people down. The website is not meant for posting memorials to represent the people that you love.The nasty people push you out.

20 years is a long time to be away from the love of your life. My heart goes out to you.

There are several people on findagrave that are interested in NUMBERS of memorials that they can do up... doesn't matter if they get them right or not...just how many they can do!

I have sent information to this one person and SHE continues to ignore my requests..she doesn't transfer..she doesn't make changes...

so I just let it go... I have reported it to findagrave...if they want to let her continue doing this...it is their right to do it...

Cindy,

I have never had any trouble getting someone to delete something or edit something... I have had trouble when *** was down...thinking that my stuff had been deleted..but it never was.. just wondered what went wrong?

Cindy,

I have never had any trouble getting someone to delete something or edit something... I have had trouble when *** was down...thinking that my stuff had been deleted..but it never was.. just wondered what went wrong?

@Guess- HAHA! My thoughts exactly!

@kermit also proves my belief of the find a grave elitist ***. As for @Find a Hobby's comments, the poster @Bdub slandered her, how? Look up the definition of slander, sweety. And, if anyone is guilty of libel, it is the Goddard woman herself.

A quick google search will bring up her bio page. How dare she create a "virtual cemetery" defaming the names of people who choose to use chalk on a headstone! Guess what, chalking is not illegal. Referring to these individuals as "culprits" is ridiculous and childish.

I've also searched through the forums and I'm assuming "Jackie" is the same woman. She makes harsh and shameful comments. I notice she has her email address removed and comments shut off.. Hmmmm, wonder why???

Hey, find a grave!

You ban people for other childish reasons, yet this woman is still a member. How is this?

@Kermit, you are wrong, obituaries ARE under copyright. For someone who is complaining about grammer and such, you need to brush up on your spelling. It's spelled COPYRIGHT.

Mrs. McPhee's letter is incoherent, a garbeld mess, poorly written and obviously a cry for help.

(Mostly from a 9th grade English teacher) If you are a person interested in genealogy find a grave is a valuable tool. Obituaries are not copywrighted nor are they private. When you write one be careful because they will be on the internet forever. If a person has entered information incorrectly then contact that person directly by his or her email on the site.

If you have no success with that then by all means contact the Find A Grave website directly. But I think your objections will have to be stated a little more coherently than in the above letters.

What a mish mash of the worst syntax ever.

:roll

Considering it's a volunteer run website, like any other if you don't like it you're free to move along to another. I also sure Ms.

Goddard will be more than pleased to see the public slander, libel and humiliation she's been subjected to by your statement. Besides an education, perhaps some social skills and psychological counseling would help both of you.

I cannot believe i was a member of this site before I ran in to the the disturbing behavior, All it took was a 1 time encounter with an admin who bans and abuses FAQS and photo volunteers. I like another person I know have vowed to warn others about the shady side of this site and FG STALKERS COME OUT OF THE WOODWORK DENISE HARDEN CHARLOTTE STOUVALL ALSO KNOWN AS PIXIE DIXIE BUGABOO AND CJ.

they block me on face book and log in under other names to read my posts :eek :upset :eek :upset :x looking up info on my kids. Hey Jim Tipton Good To Know You Protect stalkers but ban chalkers

I don't think these people know how how to pay attention to anything, skim through these complaints catching what they think suits them them remark on it like children. Your ignorance is showing, wonder how many times you embarrass yourself on a daily basis using the net to reply cause you don't have the integrity to face anyone in person, an article should be written about you and how immature you are, bet that would grab your nerves now wouldn't it.

Oh and Find a Grave is based out of Utah, so writing to the Attorney General of Utah regarding any of this sights so called administrations hassling anyone on these complaint sites should do the trick. The site should be more professional if it wants to build a good reputation of its use instead of sending its Chihuahua's to *** at the ankles of a user - that's pretty pathetic retaliation if you ask me.

Attacking anyone on any memorial is sinister. Its also illegal to harass and follow someone that is considered stalking.

Whether there is family issues or not, a site that advertises a business should provide standards to respect its users.

I agree the site should provide tools to avoid this type of nonsense, they would catch more bees with sugar.

Free service or not, it still provides a sponsership to make its money; the entire concept is to cover all basis irregardless of what others may seem to think or feel. That's the problem with today's society many dont think out the whole thing and that's what causes problems.

@SG:Find a Grave has nothing to do with the info of someone being givin out... When this info was passed on to me, out of shock I myself being in another state put a memorial site up for my daughter which was attacked by others who have no eithics.

The policies of info on C.S.S.

are stated as fact, no person shall release any info of another, second of all by doing this it only caused problems by others. Never the less it was out of line and WRONG.

I am sure Find a Grave may mean well in its efforts to offer a service for those in mourning but when others like what I and perhaps others have had to experiance with no tools to remove or block a unstable poster this is where the problems arise.

Again Some dont use their brains and that's what God gave all a brain for, how you use it or abuse it is on You however there are consequences to be paid when its misused in a fashion not suitible to the other party. And no one should have to experiance that kind of behavior by anyone at any given time!

@SG:Find a Grave has nothing to do with the info of someone being givin out... When this info was passed on to me, out of shock I myself being in another state put a memorial site up for my daughter which was attacked by others who have no eithics.

The policies of info on C.S.S.

are stated as fact, no person shall release any info of another, second of all by doing this it only caused problems by others. Never the less it was out of line and WRONG.

I am sure Find a Grave may mean well in its efforts to offer a service for those in mourning but when others like what I and perhaps others have had to experiance with no tools to remove or block a unstable poster this is where the problems arise.

Again Some dont use their brains and that's what God gave all a brain for, how you use it or abuse it is on You however there are consequences to be paid when its misused in a fashion not suitible to the other party. And no one should have to experiance that kind of behavior by anyone at any given time!

Happy Graver Wrote:Exactly how were you scammed? You were NOT. You did not have to pay a dime to join or create a memorial.

Duh George, I never said I was scammed on Find a Grave, Get your facts straight as for the Aunt she is the one who foolishly gave out info where I was. Yes the family has this issue but I am not the one who created it, THEY DID And yes it is being dealt with, because for the better judgement was not good judgement.

And Yes the Website Does not monitor its activity and it does not offer any tools to remove posts not necessary, sounds to me like you work for them and dont want to be called on the carpet.

People who post a memorial do it so others who wish to visit in a decent way. Contacting them however can at times never be completed. Never the less I got the logs to back it up.

How does Findagrave have anything to do with the deceased's Aunt giving out inf on you ? I agree with Happy Graver's comments, the problem is with the family not the website. Hope the family can work things out, life is to short.

I don't see how Find A Grave is the source of your problems. Seems to me that the problems your having is with the family of the person you posted. NOT the website.

YOU made the choice to create the memorial page. Which can be found with a simple web search. Odds were pretty good that the family would find it. Find A Grave admins are not there to deal with squabbles between family and friends of those it memorializes.

Exactly how were you scammed? You were NOT. You did not have to pay a dime to join or create a memorial.

Your problems are rooted with the family not the website

I don't know anything about you except that you have a twisted recall of events and exaggerate and stalk peoples kids, because you advertise it. you stalked me i dint stalk you so i cant send you an email. why so you can tell me you have my IP address

what you are is a liar who targeted someone and complained to an admin so you could control an entire cemetery so no one thinks your an admin we do think you are is a verbally abusive stalker that lies and that is really all it takes.

1 thread = every thread 1 memorial= is 75 million.

Anita says flying monkeys cronies and corpse hoarder Denise do you need me to show where you authored and created those words. Strange no reference of me using them but i am posting links to where you

Anita is following me yet you provide proof of following Anita and none that demonstrates she was following you this site sends you an email.

in order to determine any truth to your twisted intake of events and your perception of them, it seems i would have to take everything you accuse charlene of and turn it around. so you stole pictures and lied to admins claiming Charlene stole them. That is how you presented it to admins who took your word for it but it was a lie because admin did not know you blame others for your own crimes you had to stop her because you are in charge of a cemetery. The lady you accused could not defend herself not knowing when you play that you lie to benefit your own needs. She also did not know what you lied about so she could not defend her self.... Now Charlene never gave me the hole story she couldn't because YOU FLIPPING SCARE HER! STALKING HER KID AND BROTHER NOT HeR DEAD RELATIVES DENISE HER KID AND BROTHER they are alive !!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously my brother has a personality disorder and he does the same thing commits a disturbing act he find sick and says someone else did it and scolds them for it....He also exagerates openly like you do 1 memorial = 75 openly and gets busted because he cant keep track of all his lies....NO ONE WONDERS WHY YOU WERE CHASED AT GUN POINT NOW THAT YOU ARE STALKING MY KIDS

I am still not an administrator, don't have one in my pocket and the woman in question had her account suspended because she misrepresented someone else's work.

Since you seem to know so much about me send me an email.

PS this is how you spell exaggerate

Yes you are an admin.

Your name is ----- We all know it.

Everyone Everyone is onto the scams

You use the same old insults over and over down to the "exact" words.

Everyone is leaving this site because of you.

Hide behind user names. Your words and your style of writing give you away. People have saved your comments to provide to the police.

you dont have to be an administrator you just have to have one in your pocket. That being said your argument is not valid.

So maybe Jessica you should use your brain and think outside the box and not assume it still cant be done. The hoarder I dealt with lied lied 3 times about her memorial status and moved it around.

In tight with an administrator you can get what you want from the administrators. Denise here has a tendency to exagerate facts go read her verbal assault against this poor lady and she even drags some of her family through the mud

And I am not an administrator. You have been a member as long as me which is four years.

I just had you beat by two weeks.

Stop trying to bend the rules to suit yourself.

It ain't your sandbox and you would not have lost your "work". :grin

Yes you are an admin...

No its not anybody's "sandbox" it is a "litterbox"

You think we dont know that admins can change the site to make it look like they have not been members for long, steal other people's work, rip people off, backdate memorials and hide behind user names

Unless someone is a Find A Grave administrator, they cannot delete others' memorials. Use your head.

Report it to ancestry.com. They need to know how these people treat us.

AJ Marik is a powerwhore as are all the other so called "administration" remember the so called "faq's" stands for frequently ask questions not RULES they are just "guidelines". We are all hopeful that ancestry will eliminate the "administration" and allow former members that have been banned because of "favoritism" and bias in favor of top contributors. Jim Tipton is nothing more than a heartless mormanmoron.

... and the nature of your complaint?

Their admin is not the most responsive, but it does appear that they have a priority system in place.

Perhaps, your complaint is low on their list. Perhaps you should become a little more of a "squeaky wheel"

Jim Tipton is a f.a.g. r.a.t!

He and his pinions should have be tarred and feathered. I hope everybody takes their dogs to take a big f.a.g.

S..H..I..T! on his families graves!

Interesting tack, but effective???? If the memorials are "FREE", then they must be the product.

This is a lucrative business venture. In the words of Milton Friedman, TANSTAAFL: There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

f.a.g. administration are bullies & unsrupulous!

THEN DON'T SUPPORT THEIR BUSINESS. Let their advertisers know that you won't by products that avail themselves of their product.

Get you friends and family to do the same.

I can't believe the person calling themselves OMG just commented by saying bucko? Are you serious?

And they wrote it in all caps! This is a prime example of the behavior that goes on at f.a.g. The level of immaturity is unbelievable. The site is run by ego maniacs and most of it's minions are immature, ego-inflated, bobbleheads that have nothing better to do than disrespect the deceased and their loved ones.

Their comments speak for themselves and expose them for what they really are. "Let him rave on, that men shall know him mad"....Yul Brenner, The Ten Commandments.

don't understand the previous comment? However, I totally agree with the complaint find a grave administration only addresses their friends issues.

I suggest you contact the BBB of Utah, (that is the Better Business Bureau of Utah) and place a formal complaint they are not in good standing with the BBB, lets all keep it that way, since f.a.g. does not care as long as they continue to profit from the deaths of our loved ones.

Company Name Find A Grave Inc Headquarter PO Box 522107 Salt Lake City, UT, 84152-**** Tipton, Jim Marketing Executive Marketing Manager-Level jim@***.com Phone Number +1.801.671.4677 Industry Business Services Employees 25 - 100 Revenue $1 - 10M Ownership Privately Held

Good luck with that. Nolo bono is still in the legal dictionary.

If the pocket isn't deep, you have wasted your time, effort and money. There are more porductive uses of your time and more positive ways to celebrate the life of your daughter.

I hope that disgusting Tipton is found dead in a pool of his own, rancid urine and *** after drowning in his own vomit. He's a disgusting specimen of a vermin species. Go to ***, Tipton, you thieving SOB.

yeah all you f.a.g. members keep working to help jim tipton make millions you s...uc.....kers!

Find A Grave and its members are grave vampires!

STOP SUCKING THE LIFE OUT OF THE SURVIVORS SO JIM TIPTON CAN PROFIT FROM OUR LOVED ONES DEATHS!!!

Company Name Find A Grave Inc

Headquarter PO Box 522107

Salt Lake City, UT, 84152-****

Tipton, Jim Marketing Executive Marketing Manager-Level

jim@***.com

Phone Number +1.801.671.4677

Industry Business Services

Employees 25 - 100

Revenue $1 - 10M

Ownership Privately Held

Copyrights:

Newspapers and Copyright

Everything published in a newspaper is protected under copyright law. Copyright law grants the legal rights to a work of intellectual property to a certain party.

Web Content Is Copyrighted, Too

Just because content published on the web can be easily cut and pasted doesn't mean it is any less protected than content on the printed newspaper page. Newspapers are vigilant about protecting their copyrights, so if you're going to paste a clipping of an article to your company or organization website, always make sure you request the permission of the newspaper before doing so.

10 Big Myths about copyright explained

An attempt to answer common myths about copyright seen on the net and cover issues related to copyright and USENET/Internet publication.

- by Brad Templeton

Note that this is an essay about copyright myths. It assumes you know at least what copyright is -- basically the legal exclusive right of the author of a creative work to control the copying of that work. If you didn't know that, check out my own brief introduction to copyright for more information. Feel free to link to this document, no need to ask me. Really, NO need to ask.

1) "If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not copyrighted."

This was true in the past, but today almost all major nations follow the Berne copyright convention. For example, in the USA, almost everything created privately and originally after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not. The default you should assume for other people's works is that they are copyrighted and may not be copied unless you know otherwise. There are some old works that lost protection without notice, but frankly you should not risk it unless you know for sure.

It is true that a notice strengthens the protection, by warning people, and by allowing one to get more and different damages, but it is not necessary. If it looks copyrighted, you should assume it is. This applies to pictures, too. You may not scan pictures from magazines and post them to the net, and if you come upon something unknown, you shouldn't post that either.

The correct form for a notice is:

"Copyright [dates] by [author/owner]"

You can use C in a circle © instead of "Copyright" but "(C)" has never been given legal force. The phrase "All Rights Reserved" used to be required in some nations but is now not legally needed most places. In some countries it may help preserve some of the "moral rights."

2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."

False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's main difference under the law. It's still a violation if you give it away -- and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property. There is a USA exception for personal copying of music, which is not a violation, though courts seem to have said that doesn't include widescale anonymous personal copying as Napster. If the work has no commercial value, the violation is mostly technical and is unlikely to result in legal action. Fair use determinations (see below) do sometimes depend on the involvement of money.

3) "If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain."

False. Nothing modern and creative is in the public domain anymore unless the owner explicitly puts it in the public domain(*). Explicitly, as in you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant this to the public domain." Those exact words or words very much like them.

Some argue that posting to Usenet implicitly grants permission to everybody to copy the posting within fairly wide bounds, and others feel that Usenet is an automatic store and forward network where all the thousands of copies made are done at the command (rather than the consent) of the poster. This is a matter of some debate, but even if the former is true (and in this writer's opinion we should all pray it isn't true) it simply would suggest posters are implicitly granting permissions "for the sort of copying one might expect when one posts to Usenet" and in no case is this a placement of material into the public domain. It is important to remember that when it comes to the law, computers never make copies, only human beings make copies. Computers are given commands, not permission. Only people can be given permission. Furthermore it is very difficult for an implicit licence to supersede an explicitly stated licence that the copier was aware of.

Note that all this assumes the poster had the right to post the item in the first place. If the poster didn't, then all the copies are pirated, and no implied licence or theoretical reduction of the copyright can take place.

(*) Copyrights can expire after a long time, putting something into the public domain, and there are some fine points on this issue regarding older copyright law versions. However, none of this applies to material from the modern era, such as net postings.

Note that granting something to the public domain is a complete abandonment of all rights. You can't make something "PD for non-commercial use." If your work is PD, other people can even modify one byte and put their name on it. You might want to look into Creative Commons style licences if you want to grant wide rights.

4) "My posting was just fair use!"

See EFF notes on fair use and links from it for a detailed answer, but bear the following in mind:

The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's vital so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express your own works -- only the ability to appropriate other people's. Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren't.

Fair use is generally a short excerpt and almost always attributed. (One should not use much more of the work than is needed to make the commentary.) It should not harm the commercial value of the work -- in the sense of people no longer needing to buy it (which is another reason why reproduction of the entire work is a problem.) Famously, copying just 300 words from Gerald Ford's 200,000 word memoir for a magazine article was ruled as not fair use, in spite of it being very newsworthy, because it was the most important 300 words -- why he pardoned Nixon.

Note that most inclusion of text in followups and replies is for commentary, and it doesn't damage the commercial value of the original posting (if it has any) and as such it is almost surely fair use. Fair use isn't an exact doctrine, though. The court decides if the right to comment overrides the copyright on an individual basis in each case. There have been cases that go beyond the bounds of what I say above, but in general they don't apply to the typical net misclaim of fair use.

The "fair use" concept varies from country to country, and has different names (such as "fair dealing" in Canada) and other limitations outside the USA.

Facts and ideas can't be copyrighted, but their expression and structure can. You can always write the facts in your own wordsthough

See the DMCA alert for recent changes in the law.

5) "If you don't defend your copyright you lose it." -- "Somebody has that name copyrighted!"

False. Copyright is effectively never lost these days, unless explicitly given away. You also can't "copyright a name" or anything short like that, such as almost all titles. You may be thinking of trade marks, which apply to names, and can be weakened or lost if not defended.

You generally trademark terms by using them to refer to your brand of a generic type of product or service. Like a "Delta" airline. Delta Airlines "owns" that word applied to air travel, even though it is also an ordinary word. Delta Hotels owns it when applied to hotels. (This case is fairly unusual as both are travel companies. Usually the industries are more distinct.) Neither owns the word on its own, only in context, and owning a mark doesn't mean complete control -- see a more detailed treatise on this law for details.

You can't use somebody else's trademark in a way that would steal the value of the mark, or in a way that might make people confuse you with the real owner of the mark, or which might allow you to profit from the mark's good name. For example, if I were giving advice on music videos, I would be very wary of trying to label my works with a name like "mtv." :-) You can use marks to critcise or parody the holder, as long as it's clear you aren't the holder.

6) "If I make up my own stories, but base them on another work, my new work belongs to me."

False. U.S. Copyright law is quite explicit that the making of what are called "derivative works" -- works based or derived from another copyrighted work -- is the exclusive province of the owner of the original work. This is true even though the making of these new works is a highly creative process. If you write a story using settings or characters from somebody else's work, you need that author's permission.

Yes, that means almost all "fan fiction" is arguably a copyright violation. If you want to publish a story about Jim Kirk and Mr. Spock, you need Paramount's permission, plain and simple. Now, as it turns out, many, but not all holders of popular copyrights turn a blind eye to "fan fiction" or even subtly encourage it because it helps them. Make no mistake, however, that it is entirely up to them whether to do that.

There is a major exception -- criticism and parody. The fair use provision says that if you want to make fun of something like Star Trek, you don't need their permission to include Mr. Spock. This is not a loophole; you can't just take a non-parody and claim it is one on a technicality. The way "fair use" works is you get sued for copyright infringement, and you admit you did copy, but that your copying was a fair use. A subjective judgment on, among other things, your goals, is then made.

However, it's also worth noting that a court has never ruled on this issue, because fan fiction cases always get settled quickly when the defendant is a fan of limited means sued by a powerful publishing company. Some argue that completely non-commercial fan fiction might be declared a fair use if courts get to decide. You can read more

7) "They can't get me, defendants in court have powerful rights!"

Copyright law is mostly civil law. If you violate copyright you would usually get sued, not be charged with a crime. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle of criminal law, as is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." Sorry, but in copyright suits, these don't apply the same way or at all. It's mostly which side and set of evidence the judge or jury accepts or believes more, though the rules vary based on the type of infringement. In civil cases you can even be made to testify against your own interests.

8) "Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?"

Actually, in the 90s in the USA commercial copyright violation involving more than 10 copies and value over $2500 was made a felony. So watch out. (At least you get the protections of criminal law.) On the other hand, don't think you're going to get people thrown in jail for posting your E-mail. The courts have much better things to do. This is a fairly new, untested statute. In one case an operator of a pirate BBS that didn't charge was acquited because he didn't charge, but congress amended the law to cover that.

9) "It doesn't hurt anybody -- in fact it's free advertising."

It's up to the owner to decide if they want the free ads or not. If they want them, they will be sure to contact you. Don't rationalize whether it hurts the owner or not, ask them. Usually that's not too hard to do. Time past, ClariNet published the very funny Dave Barry column to a large and appreciative Usenet audience for a fee, but some person didn't ask, and forwarded it to a mailing list, got caught, and the newspaper chain that employs Dave Barry pulled the column from the net, *** off everybody who enjoyed it. Even if you can't think of how the author or owner gets hurt, think about the fact that piracy on the net hurts everybody who wants a chance to use this wonderful new technology to do more than read other people's flamewars.

10) "They e-mailed me a copy, so I can post it."

To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not, unless previously agreed, secret. So you can certainly report on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message would almost surely get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts E-mail you sent them. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them. Note as well that, the law aside, keeping private correspondence private is a courtesy one should usually honour.

11)"So I can't ever reproduce anything?"

Myth #11 (I didn't want to change the now-famous title of this article) is actually one sometimes generated in response to this list of 10 myths. No, copyright isn't an iron-clad lock on what can be published. Indeed, by many arguments, by providing reward to authors, it encourages them to not just allow, but fund the publication and distribution of works so that they reach far more people than they would if they were free or unprotected -- and unpromoted. However, it must be remembered that copyright has two main purposes, namely the protection of the author's right to obtain commercial benefit from valuable work, and more recently the protection of the author's general right to control how a work is used.

While copyright law makes it technically illegal to reproduce almost any new creative work (other than under fair use) without permission, if the work is unregistered and has no real commercial value, it gets very little protection. The author in this case can sue for an injunction against the publication, actual damages from a violation, and possibly court costs. Actual damages means actual money potentially lost by the author due to publication, plus any money gained by the defendant. But if a work has no commercial value, such as a typical E-mail message or conversational USENET posting, the actual damages will be zero. Only the most vindictive (and rich) author would sue when no damages are possible, and the courts don't look kindly on vindictive plaintiffs, unless the defendants are even more vindictive.

The author's right to control what is done with a work, however, has some validity, even if it has no commercial value. If you feel you need to violate a copyright "because you can get away with it because the work has no value" you should ask yourself why you're doing it. In general, respecting the rights of creators to control their creations is a principle many advocate adhering to.

In addition, while quite often people make incorrect claims of "fair use" it is a still valid and important concept necessary to allow the criticism of copyrighted works and their creators through examples. It's also been extended to allow things like home recording of TV shows and moving music from CDs you own to your MP3 player. But please read more about it before you do it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Summary

These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.

Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.

Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except perhaps the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.

Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.

Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.

Fan fiction and other work derived from copyrighted works is a copyright violation.

Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.

Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.

Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value.

No public cemeteries are not "fair game" there is no such thing as "fair game" all gravestones, grave plots were purchased by family and NO ONE has the right to profit from taking pictures of them and putting on f.a.g. for tipton to profit from.

:sigh

Private property is a no-no, but public cemeteries are fair game. As for me, if a member of the immediate family requests removal, I would comply from respect.

Nothing is more precious then remembering those family members we have lost. There is nothing illegal about posting photos taken in public places.

These people work hard and long for no pay. I lost my older sister while she was a baby. This made me happy that she isn't just a Rock somewhere.

There are some sick people out there who love to find fault with everything. Next you'll want the Internet shut don!

Nothing is more precious then remembering those family members we have lost. There is nothing illegal about posting photos taken in public places.

These people work hard and long for no pay.

I lost my older sister while she was a baby. This made me happy that she isn't just a Rick somewhere

That they choose to go doesn't mean they know what they're gienttg themselves into. If you go on an adventure to a far away country, you can prepare yourself by learning a about the language, culture, customs etc but there is NOTHING that can prepare you for the things that you're about to experience.

And I'm just talking about an unplanned vacation. The feeling of suddenly being confronted with a reality you were unaware of is not something that you can imagine if you haven't experienced it. I'm sure this feeling is a lot more intense for a young soldier in a war.

Believe me, watching discovery channel doesn't teach you anything about the real world outside your living room. You may not like what they're doing or who they're representing, but they deserve our sympathy and respect none the less.

Hmmm I'd like to know what kind of weapon was used to FORCE you to open that thread? Am curious...

Those pictures were wrong to post *** lounge people were so phoney it made me sick what a bunch of losers.

I am a member of find a grave yes there are rules to what you can post, however If the pictures are taken by immediate family and posted on here THATS THEIR DECISION and if someone runs across them and disaproved then well thats their problem. YOU dont have to look.

Find A Grave def has it's Rules - but more Importantly - have the Hoarders of Find A Grave ever taken the time to be Human for just a moment - and consider that each person grieves differently?

This is most likely what has happened in this case. This was how this person handles their grief.

NOTE: To Hoarders - "Compassion" is a word, I'm certain is completely foreign to you, but many others can surely understand.

I read your thread. I know it was a while ago that you had the discussion but I'd like comment.

My 17 year old son shot himself on

August 4th, 2010. I was able to see him the day after he died. He had a bandage on his head and his eyes were very red and swollen but he looked like my son. I took pictures.

I don't know why but I did. At his viewing (after embalming) he didn't look like my son at all. He looked like he was a wax doll. He looked like he was holding his breath in.

His father had nightmares about seeing him in his casket. I showed him the photos I'd taken and he stopped having the nightmares. I realized there were so many people who saw him that way. I posted the photos I took of him on his facebook page.

I know that those photos have helped so many people

So maybe you should find out reasons why someone posted them. Actually, its not your family member so you should stop trying to get get people in trouble like a little tattle tale then complaining when someone doesn't get in trouble.

We all grieve in different ways. So let the families grieve and heal their own way.

You said, "You can't get nothing done by hiding behind generic terms, call them out on it."

You do that, and you will be banned without notice or explanation. They ban people all the time for no reason other than that you disagree with them or one of their "pets". What makes you think they won't do it to you?

You pro-gravers are missing the point. The rules clearly state, no post-mortem photos! Here they are for you:

ONLY post photos for which YOU hold the copyright (meaning photos you took)!!!

The copyright of all photos posted to Find A Grave remains with the original submitter. No use of photos for any other website or personal use is given without prior consent of the original submitter.

JPEG format preferred (.jpg or .jpeg).

200-800 pixel width and less than 350 KB

Cropped with no surrounding white space.

No decorative graphics or animated GIFs.

No white space around the photo

No photo frames (the ones added with a graphic program)

No graphic embellishments (photo graphics like flowers put randomly on a photo)

No post-mortem photos.

No photos taken from other web sites!!!

I don't object to post-mortum photos.

Victorian customs aside - where besides being sad and heartfelt memorials, some of the post-mortem pix are truly beautiful - in the modern world, post-mortems taken by loved ones are like a dirty little underground secret. A LOT of people have them of their loved ones, so clearly it is much more common to take them than is generally believed - and I have been shown many of them over the years, from babies in their mothers arms to older folks in their coffins. Because they are so often taken now furtively by family rather than a professional, they are not always as lovely as the pictures taken 140 years back but clearly, these pictures are very, very important to the families involved.

I don't think its necessarily the way I'd personally like to be portrayed, but it's not in the same category as accident scene pictures. When taken by family, the intent is respectful and heart felt, and part of their way of memorializing the person and dealing with their grief.

It is obvous you know my name, but I don't know yours.

What do you mean by "you have been cheated" and " are being stalked"?

Both terms are not related to the work done on Find-A-Grave.

Rudy, they would be greater if they respected their users, word travels fast when you been cheated, its a shame a site will put up all these rules and not abide by a user's request when they are being stalked, to me thats disrespect at its highest accord!