Sigh… the City is at it again
It seems like New York City is determined to close every genealogically-valuable record that it can — and when it just can’t close them, it’ll put a price tag on them that may have the same effect.
Readers of The Legal Genealogist will remember the fight over imposing long closure periods to New York City vital records that we as a genealogical community lost back in 2018.1
Now another arm of city government is trying to make people pay an extra fee to use copies of records they purchase from the city.
Yes, I’m serious: a pending rule by the New York City Department of Records and Information Services (DORIS) will impose a licensing fee for the use of tons and tons of genealogically-relevant materials — on top of a copying fee for getting the materials to begin with.
DORIS, by the way, is the agency that runs the New York City Municipal Archives — and holds the bulk of New York City’s public records: its own website says the Municipal Archives “comprises the largest local government archive in North America…the Archives hold the records depicting the daily work of city government, including paper records…still and moving images, ledgers and docket books, vital records, cartographic materials, blueprints, and sound recordings.”2
So … what will the new rule do, if adopted?
For example, imagine that I want a copy of a death certificate for someone who died in New York City more than 100 years ago to use — say — here in this blog.
I know I will pay — and it’s reasonable for me to have to pay — to get that certificate sent to me. There’s a real cost to any repository in retrieving the document from storage and making and sending a copy.
Fair enough.
But now I want to use the certificate I’ve bought and paid for — and DORIS wants me to pay for the privilege of doing that, with an additional licensing fee.
Seriously: a licensing fee to use public records for educational, scholarly, non-profit, and media purposes. They are literally proposing limits on individuals, genealogists, biographers, historians, members of the press, and other researchers from sharing or publishing these public records without paying an additional fee.
If I’m writing a book, and want to incorporate 100 certificates, I’d have to pay at least $1,500 extra for the privilege of using certificates I’ve already paid to get copies of.
And that is not reasonable, not when it comes to public records, held by a public agency.
And we have only a short window to tell DORIS just what we think of this.
We have until October 23rd to file comments on this proposed rule.
Here’s what we all need to do:
• Head over to the information page of the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society (NYG&B) that explains the issue. You’ll find it here: “Stop Licensing Fees for Public Records.”
• After getting a good handle on what this means to you and to all researchers, submit your own comment in your own words opposing licensing fees for public records. Remember, the deadline is October 23, 2020, and the comments can be sent by email to DORISrules@records.nyc.gov.
• Join with others in signing the public comment from NYG&B at https://www.newyorkfamilyhistory.org/access-alert.
• Participate in the online public hearing, October 23, 2020, at 11:00 AM ET. There’s more information about that here: https://rules.cityofnewyork.us/rule/32136/.
• Tell your friends, your colleagues and anybody you can think of who cares about keeping public records public.
Genealogists are willing to pay our fair share. We accept, even if we don’t like the fact, that there’s a cost to getting copies of the records we want.
But tossing an additional licensing fee in to be able to use a copy of a record we’ve already bought and paid for?
No. Not a fair share.
Speak out.
Oppose the DORIS rule.
Cite/link to this post: Judy G. Russell, “Heads up on NYC records access!,” The Legal Genealogist (https://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog : posted 7 Oct 2020).
SOURCES
- See Judy G. Russell, “NY’s black hole gets blacker,” The Legal Genealogist, posted 8 Mar 2018 (https://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog : accessed 7 Oct 2020). ↩
- “Municipal Archives,” New York City Records and Information Services, New York City Department of Records and Information Services (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/records/index.page : accessed 7 October 2020). ↩
thanks so much for highlighting this. I immediately took action, as suggested.
FYI – The response I received:
Thank you for commenting on the proposed update to the Rules of the Department of Records and Information Services. The Department does not plan to charge a license fee, or request permission, for the personal use of genealogy records. DORIS currently has a license fee that is charged when items are commercially reproduced. The rule simply updates that license fee to bring it in line with similar institutions. We understand that the language in the proposed rule may be confusing and we will ensure that the final rule clarifies this matter before it is published. We apologize for any mis-understanding and we look forward to continuing to help people around the world document their New York City roots.
Although it’s unusual in the US, aren’t they effectively claiming ownership of the copyright to these records? Other countries, e.g., England and Scotland, have been doing this for years.
No, they’re exercising a contract right (“we have ’em, you want ’em”) the way a private repository can. It would be a lot easier to defeat this if they were claiming a copyright (since the law would be 100% on our side then).
Would this apply retroactively? I’ve ordered marriage and death records from them going back years now. In theory, if this new rule were approved, would I still have to pay an extra fee for records that I already have copies of?
I can’t see how it could apply retroactively, but… That’s one of many issues with this silly idea. 🙁
Thank you for keeping us all informed, not only on this, but on so many other issues.
It always irked me to see that the NYC Muni Archives used the indexes of the Italian Genealogy Group (IGG). I, personally, spent many hours indexing those records. I don’t believe there was compensation to IGG, but I might be wrong.
IMO, the NYC Muni Archives has not been researcher-friendly in my 10+ years of going there.
They don’t allow screen shots.
They also used to let a researcher request a non-certified copy. That is no longer an option; we all have to request the higher-priced certified copy.
Then, they changed the dates for records to be accessed, despite much protest against it and almost no argument for it.
Now, this.
Thank you for your outline as to how to fight this. I will take your advice and take those actions. Unfortunately, I don’t think NYC is open to feedback. They just go through the motions.
So how do they know that the document that I have I got from them after this change, or if it was a copy I had for years? I have birth certificates that were original issue. I have others that I do not even know where they came from.
That’s one of the issues I think everybody has…
Your current fee for paying for documents is acceptable. However the additional fee for how it is used is sooooooo not acceptable. Where is your heart and soul?
“Commercial use” is a bit of a catch-all.
To one person it might mean showing something on national TV.
To another it might mean use in a genealogy textbook.
But the killer is use in a family tree book.
Presumably someone putting out a book on a family tree of NY citizens back to whenever would be due to pay that fee on EVERY SINGLE MENTION of affected records – if they dared to request a contribution towards printing and postage.
Is that what is at risk?
If so, it’s egregious – at least in an ethical sense.