this is a problem that's been talked about in genealogical circles over the past year or two (at least as far as i'm aware, as a member of the council of genealogy columnists ... no joke!) generally speaking, it's no longer considered a good idea to post information about living people in these family trees (and especially without their permission!) ... nor, imho, is it any longer a good idea to use maiden names as passwords. whenever you have a situation where people are trading personal information, there's a tough decision on how much to disclose. genealogy.com, rootsweb.com, ancestry.com, etc., give folks a choice on how much information they can disclose.... and i can't imagine any law that would forbid me to disclose the names of my forebears if i want to. however, when you get into disclosing the personal background of other living people en masse, that's when the debate gets a bit stickier. suppose i gathered a lot of info about, say, cousin declan by checking birth/marriage/death records (or by asking him about his ancestry for the family tree). should i be legally liable somehow if i revealed enough information about him for someone to cause him injury or damage? does intent play a role in that liability? does it matter if i revealed it over the web or by sending a printed copy of the family tree to cousin X ... who happened to be an adept cybercriminal? do existing laws cover this scenario? -----Original Message----- From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 3:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Congressional panel targets new privacy threat: Genealogy This is, sadly, not a joke. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,36442,00.html New Privacy Threat: Genealogy? by Declan McCullagh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 3:00 p.m. May. 18, 2000 PDT Just when you thought there was nothing new to say about the oft-cited privacy threats that Americans face, along comes Congress with another worry: genealogy. During a privacy hearing Thursday before a House Judiciary subcommittee, Rep. Ed Pease (R-Ind.) said the growing number of websites that allow people to trace their families' history was a threat that called for legislative action. "There are some commercial ventures now providing information on this subject ... oftentimes genealogical information involves a mother's maiden name, and that is often used by many as a password," Pease said. Genealogy.com, for instance, says it has 470 million names in its database. It allows you to search someone's family tree using their full or partial name. Clinton administration representatives -- who were planning to testify before the panel about cookies and industry self-regulation -- were caught completely off-guard by Pease's comments. "This is not really anything I've heard about yet," replied Andrew Pincus, general counsel to the U.S. Department of Commerce. "We're dealing mainly with commercial sites, and not these," said Jodie Bernstein, director of the bureau of consumer protection at the Federal Trade Commission. Pease shot back that "a growing number of commercial ventures" provided such potentially troubling information and he'd "sure appreciate" it if the FTC would investigate. To survive a free speech challenge, any legal restrictions Congress imposes would have to comply with the First Amendment, which limits government controls on publications and websites. [...remainder snipped...]
